United States of America v. Edward McIntosh

17-30036Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit13.04.2018

Gesamter Gesetzestext

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
EDWARD MCINTOSH,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-30036
D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00082-LRS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Edward McIntosh appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for possession with intent to
distribute five grams or more of actual methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 841(a)(1). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), McIntosh’s
* 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
APR 13 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-30036
counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a
motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided McIntosh the
opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or
answering brief has been filed.
McIntosh waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, with the
exception of the court’s guideline calculations or an illegal 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 guideline calculations or
legality of the sentence. 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. The government’s motion
for summary affirmance is DENIED as moot.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.