USA v. Daniel Nicherie, No. 09-50312 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 07 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 09-50312 D.C. No. 2:05-cr-01046-DSF-5 v. MEMORANDUM* DANIEL NICHERIE, AKA Seal F, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 30, 2010** Pasadena, California Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, O SCANNLAIN and GOULD, Circuit Judges. Nicherie appeals the district court s revocation of his supervised release. Nicherie s counsel has filed an Anders brief stating that there are no arguable * 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). page 2 grounds for relief and a motion to withdraw as counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); United States v. Griffy, 895 F.2d 561, 562 63 (9th Cir. 1990). Nicherie alleges in a declaration supporting his motion for appointment of new counsel that the district court committed various errors at his revocation hearing. We have independently examined the record and found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. United States v. Aguilar-Muniz, 156 F.3d 974, 978 (9th Cir. 1998); see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 81 (1988). Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. Nicherie s motion for appointment of new counsel is denied. AFFIRMED.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.