United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Carl Edward Beed, Defendant-appellant, 145 F.3d 1341 (9th Cir. 1998)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 145 F.3d 1341 (9th Cir. 1998) May 22, 1998

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Los Angeles.

Before: SCHROEDER, TROTT, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM1 

COLLINS, J., Presiding


Submitted May 14, 19982 

Carl Edward Beed appeals his conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, and sentence for conspiracy and unarmed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 2113(a). Beed's attorney has filed a brief stating that she can identify no issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Beed has filed a supplemental pro se brief. Our examination of the briefs and our independent review of the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300 (1988), discloses no issues for review. Moreover, Beed's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is more appropriately raised in a collateral proceeding. See United States v. Bosch, 951 F.2d 1546, 1549 (9th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, deny Beed's request for appointment of new counsel, and affirm the district court's judgment.

AFFIRMED.

 1

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3

 2

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

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.