USA V. BRIAN WALKER, No. 21-10209 (9th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 22 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 21-10209 D.C. No. 2:20-cr-00839-DJH-1 v. MEMORANDUM* BRIAN DAVID WALKER, AKA Brian Damien Walker Wraith, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Diane J. Humetewa, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 15, 2022** Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges. Brian David Walker appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 10-month sentence for failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Walker’s counsel has filed a brief stating that * 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). there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Walker has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No 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 on direct appeal. Contrary to Walker’s pro se contention, application of § 2250(a) did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. See United States v. Elkins, 683 F.3d 1039, 1045 (9th Cir. 2012). In addition, by entering an unconditional guilty plea, Walker waived his right to bring his pro se challenges to the validity of the indictment and the denial of his motion to dismiss. See Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973). Walker’s remaining pro se contentions are not supported by the record and are otherwise unavailing. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Walker’s pro se motion to strike the Anders brief, and all other pending motions, are denied. AFFIRMED. 2 21-10209

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.