United States of America v. Fabian Vaksman

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FABIAN VAKSMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-30302
D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00074-WFN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Wm. Fremming Nielsen, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Fabian Vanksman appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 10-month
sentence for contempt of court, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 401(3). Pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Vaksman’s counsel has filed a brief
stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel
FILED
SEP 19 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-30302 2
of record. We have provided Vaksman with 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. We
dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d
1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).
Vaksman’s pro se request for appointment of substitute counsel, pro se
motions for certification to the Washington Supreme Court, and pro se
supplemental motions for certification to the Washington Supreme Court are
DENIED.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --