United States of America v. Brian Scott Burdsall

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
BRIAN SCOTT BURDSALL,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-50022
D.C. No. 8:16-cr-00072-JLS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Josephine L. Staton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Brian Scott Burdsall appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 27-month sentence for wire fraud, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), Burdsall’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
FEB 16 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-50022
relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided
Burdsall the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se
supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Burdsall waived his right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of an
appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary. He also waived the right to
appeal most aspects of his sentence. Our independent review of the record
pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds
for relief as to the voluntariness of Burdsall’s plea or any aspects of the sentence
that fall outside the scope of the waiver. We therefore affirm as to those issues.
We dismiss the remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See
United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --