USA V. MARCIAL FALCON, No. 15-50464 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED JUL 17 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 15-50464 D.C. No. 8:10-cr-00035-DOC v. MEMORANDUM* MARCIAL FALCON, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 11, 2017** Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. Marcial Falcon appeals from the 2015 judgment revoking his supervised release and imposing a ten-month sentence. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Falcon’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 * 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). provided Falcon the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. The record reflects that, after Falcon served his ten-month sentence and was placed on supervised release, his supervised release was again revoked. Because the sentence imposed for the 2015 revocation is no longer in effect, we can provide no effective relief to Falcon. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal as moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7-14 (1998). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. DISMISSED. 2 15-50464

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.