14-50424•United States of America v. Brian Scott Orr
14-50424Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit18 de abr. de 2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BRIAN SCOTT ORR,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-50424
D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00872-DMG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Dolly M. Gee, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 13, 2016**
Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Brian Scott Orr appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his
guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for theft of government property, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), Orr’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief,
FILED
APR 18 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 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).
-- 1 of 2 --
along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Orr filed pro se a letter and
supplemental brief raising several arguments that the court has considered.
Orr waived his right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of an
appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary. Orr also 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 the voluntariness of Orr’s plea or any sentencing issue
outside the scope of the appeal waiver. We therefore affirm as to those issues.
We grant the government’s motion to 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).
We decline to address on direct appeal Orr’s contention that his attorney was
ineffective. See United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).
Orr’s pending pro se motions are denied.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
14-50424 2
-- 2 of 2 --
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.