The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
14-50216•United States of America v. Terry Richard Sommerville
14-50216Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJun 29, 2015
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TERRY RICHARD SOMMERVILLE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-50216
D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00929-ABC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Audrey B. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 22, 2015**
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Terry Richard Sommerville appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 180-month sentence for sexual
exploitation of a child, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a). Pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Sommerville’s counsel has filed a brief stating
FILED
JUN 29 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
-- 1 of 2 --
that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of
record. We have provided Sommerville the opportunity to file a pro se
supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
filed.
Sommerville waived his right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of
an appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary. Sommerville also waived
the right to appeal five specified issues related to 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 Sommerville’s plea or any
sentencing issue outside the scope of the appeal 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.
14-50216 2
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.