Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Andrade ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-08-16
Citations: 447 F. App'x 795
Docket Number: No. 09-50280
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Andrade ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 447
Pages: 795–796

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Andrade ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-50280.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 11, 2011.
Filed Aug. 16, 2011.
Keri Curtis Axel, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los An-geles, CA, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Kurt J. Mayer, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, 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
Mario Andrade Estrada appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Andrade Estrada'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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.