USA V. EUGENE FULKS, No. 19-10206 (9th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 10 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 19-10206 D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00317-JMS-1 v. MEMORANDUM* EUGENE M. FULKS, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii J. Michael Seabright, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 8, 2020** Before: CALLAHAN, NGUYEN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Eugene M. Fulks appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the revocation of supervised release and the 15-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Fulks’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to * 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). withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Fulks 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. 2 19-10206

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.