United States of America v. Jason Michael Terpstra

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JASON MICHAEL TERPSTRA,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10375
D.C. No.
3:13-cr-08190-GMS-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 24, 2016**
Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
Jason Michael Terpstra appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 110-month sentence for being a felon in
possession of firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Terpstra’s counsel has filed
FILED
AUG 26 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 --

a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw
as counsel of record. We have provided Terpstra the opportunity to file a pro se
supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
filed.
Terpstra has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Because
the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waivers, we
dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.
2009).
We decline to review any ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct
appeal. See United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1260 (9th Cir. 2011)
(holding that we review ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal
only in the unusual cases where the record is sufficiently developed or the legal
representation is so obviously inadequate that it denies a defendant his Sixth
Amendment right to counsel). We leave open the possibility that Terpstra might
raise an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in collateral proceedings. See id.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --