United States of America v. Marcial Falcon

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MARCIAL FALCON,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-50464
D.C. No. 8:10-cr-00035-DOC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 11, 2017**
Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Marcial Falcon appeals from the 2015 judgment revoking his supervised
release and imposing a ten-month sentence. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), Falcon’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
* 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
JUL 17 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-50464
provided Falcon the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se
supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
The record reflects that, after Falcon served his ten-month sentence and was
placed on supervised release, his supervised release was again revoked. Because
the sentence imposed for the 2015 revocation is no longer in effect, we can provide
no effective relief to Falcon. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal as moot. See
Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7-14 (1998).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --