USA V. CEMONE LEWIS, No. 21-15592 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 21 2021 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CEMONE CHAMPAGNE LEWIS, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 21-15592 D.C. Nos. 2:20-cv-01073-APG 2:18-cr-00055-APG-GWF-1 MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 14, 2021** Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Cemone Champagne Lewis appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his conviction and sentence. 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 * 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). as counsel of record. We have provided Lewis 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 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). Lewis’s counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. 2 21-15592

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.