Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus Ernesto MORAILA-ELIZONDO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-18
Citations: 146 F. App'x 190
Docket Number: No. 05-10089
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jesus Ernesto MORAILA-ELIZONDO, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: T.G. NELSON, WARDLAW and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 146
Pages: 190–191

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jesus Ernesto MORAILA-ELIZONDO, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-10089.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 11, 2005.
Decided Oct. 18, 2005.
Michael T. Morrissey, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Donald W. Macpherson, Esq., The Macpherson Group, PC, Glendale, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: T.G. NELSON, WARDLAW and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jesus Ernesto Moraila-Elizondo appeals his conviction and 50-month sentence imposed for illegal re-entry into the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Moraila-Elizondo has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief has been filed. Because our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), indicates that Moraila-Elizondo knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal and was sentenced within the terms of the plea agreement, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that an appeal waiver is valid when it is entered knowingly and voluntarily); see also United States v. Cardenas, 405 F.3d 1046, 1048 (9th Cir.2005) (noting that the changes in sentencing law imposed by United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), did not render waiver of appeal involuntary and unknowing).
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED. The appeal is DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.