United States of America v. Heidi Welch

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
HEIDI WELCH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10581
D.C. No. 2:11-cr-50074-FJM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Frederick J. Martone, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Heidi Welch appeals from the revocation of supervised release and the five-
month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), Welch’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for
relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided
FILED
SEP 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10581 2
Welch 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.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
Counsel’s motion requesting a ruling from the court on her motion to
withdraw is denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --