                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         DEC 3 2018
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                        U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    18-10058

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:05-cr-00233-LRH

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
OSCAR JAMES MITCHELL,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Nevada
                    Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted November 27, 2018**

Before:      CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

      Oscar James Mitchell appeals from the revocation of supervised release and

the 14-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), Mitchell’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 Mitchell 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                                 18-10058
