USA V. BRITTANY SEIBEL, No. 10-10397 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 09 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 10-10397 D.C. No. 4:08-cr-00916-CKJ v. MEMORANDUM * BRITTANY ANNE SEIBEL, a.k.a. Brittany Seibel, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 6, 2012 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. Brittany Anne Seibel appeals from her jury-trial conviction and 60-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(vii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. * 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). 738 (1967), Seibel s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. Accordingly, counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court s judgment is AFFIRMED. 2 10-10397

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.