Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto RENTERIA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-10
Citations: 370 F. App'x 827
Docket Number: No. 08-10441
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto RENTERIA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 370
Pages: 827–828

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto RENTERIA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10441.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 16, 2010.
Filed March 10, 2010.
Elizabeth A. Olson, Esquire, Assistant U.S., U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mario D. Valencia, Esquire, Attorney at Law, Henderson, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Gilberto Renteria, California City, CA, pro se.
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Gilberto Renteria appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 121-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Renteria's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.