United States v. Terry Sommerville , 609 F. App'x 398 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                           JUN 29 2015
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 14-50216
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00929-ABC
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    TERRY RICHARD SOMMERVILLE,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    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
    *
    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).
    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.
    2                                   14-50216
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-50216

Citation Numbers: 609 F. App'x 398

Filed Date: 6/29/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023