CANDICE LEWIS V. WALTER MILLER, No. 13-16078 (9th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 21 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CANDICE LEWIS, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 13-16078 Petitioner-Appellant, v. D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00423-TLN MEMORANDUM* WALTER MILLER, Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 16, 2016** Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Candice Lewis appeals from the district court’s order denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Lewis’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 Lewis the * 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). opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. Our independent review of the briefing and record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses that the certified issue provides no basis for appellate relief. See Graves v. McEwen, 731 F.3d 876, 880-81 (9th Cir. 2013). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. 2 13-16078

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.