United States of America v. Daniel Park, a.k.a. Dane Hamilton

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DANIEL PARK, a.k.a. Dane Hamilton,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-50200
D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00564-MWF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Michael W. Fitzgerald, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 16, 2016**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Daniel Park appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
87-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession
with intent to distribute oxycodone, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(C). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Park’s counsel
FILED
AUG 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

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 Park the opportunity to file a
pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has
been filed.
Park waived the right to appeal five specified issues related to his sentence.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to any sentencing issue outside
the scope of the appeal waiver. We therefore affirm as to those issues. We dismiss
the remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v.
Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
14-50200 2

-- 2 of 2 --