UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Samuel Marks HUMPHREY, aka Eddie Joe Alston, aka Leon Archie, aka Michael Gordy, aka Kenneth Smith, Defendant-Appellant.
Decided: September 11, 2020
Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Brandon Kimura, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, Daniel Earl Zipp, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Samuel Marks Humphrey, Pro Se
Samuel Marks Humphrey appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and sentence of time served for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Humphrey's 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 Humphrey the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed, but the court has reviewed Humphrey's pro se filings.
Humphrey waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
Humphrey's pro se motions to dismiss and for appointment of substitute counsel, as well as his other requests, are denied.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.