Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sergio Delgado MONTOYA, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar-Jimenez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-12-06
Citations: 548 F. App'x 429
Docket Number: Nos. 12-10662, 12-10663
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sergio Delgado MONTOYA, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar-Jimenez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 548
Pages: 429–429

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sergio Delgado MONTOYA, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar-Jimenez, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 12-10662, 12-10663.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 19, 2013.
Filed Dec. 6, 2013.
Serra Marie Tsethlikai, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Darla Jean Mondou, Esquire, Mondou Law Office, Maraña, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, 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
In these consolidated appeals, Sergio Delgado Montoya appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 30-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326; and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Delgado Montoya'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 provided Delgado Montoya the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Delgado Montoya has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and his right to appeal the revocation of supervised release and the sentence imposed upon revocation. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waivers. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009). We accordingly dismiss these appeals. See id. at 988.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.