United States of America v. Mark Anthony Simmons

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MARK ANTHONY SIMMONS,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-10047
D.C. No. 4:04-cr-02090-DCB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Mark Anthony Simmons appeals from the district court’s order denying his
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. Pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Simmons’s counsel has filed a brief stating that
there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of
* 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
DEC 20 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-10047
record. We have provided Simmons the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental
brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --