Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fausto Renato QUEVEDO, a.k.a. Apple, a.k.a. Fausto Quevedo Guarcas, a.k.a. Calvin Martinez, a.k.a. Raul Martinez, a.k.a. Frausto Quevedo, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-24
Citations: 531 F. App'x 808
Docket Number: No. 12-50387
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fausto Renato QUEVEDO, a.k.a. Apple, a.k.a. Fausto Quevedo Guarcas, a.k.a. Calvin Martinez, a.k.a. Raul Martinez, a.k.a. Frausto Quevedo, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: TALLMAN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 531
Pages: 808–808

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fausto Renato QUEVEDO, a.k.a. Apple, a.k.a. Fausto Quevedo Guarcas, a.k.a. Calvin Martinez, a.k.a. Raul Martinez, a.k.a. Frausto Quevedo, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-50387.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 18, 2013.
Filed June 24, 2013.
Curtis A. Kin, Esquire, Assistant U.S., James Michael Left, Special Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los An-geles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Kurt- J. Mayer, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: TALLMAN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, 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
Fausto Renato Quevedo appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, 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), Quevedo'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 Quevedo 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.