United States of America v. HARRY LEE REDDS, Jr.

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
HARRY LEE REDDS, Jr.,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-50320
D.C. No. 3:08-cr-01835-BTM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Barry T. Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 24, 2013**
Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Harry Lee Redds, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking
supervised release and the sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Redds’s counsel has filed a brief stating that
there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of
FILED
OCT 03 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-50320 2
record. We have provided Redds the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental
brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
A review of the record indicates that this appeal is moot because Redds’s
supervised release has again been revoked. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7
(1998). We accordingly dismiss the appeal.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --