USA V. DEVON JACKSON, No. 13-30214 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 27 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 13-30214 D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00169-JLR-1 v. MEMORANDUM* DEVON JACKSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 18, 2014** Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges. Devon Jackson appeals from the district court s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 96-month sentence for distribution of a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C), and money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) and 2. Pursuant to * 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). Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Jackson s counsel 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 Jackson the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. 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 Jackson s conviction. We accordingly affirm his conviction. Jackson has waived the right to appeal his sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the sentencing waiver, we dismiss Jackson s appeal as to his sentence. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). Counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
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.
