Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin ACEVEDO-VAZQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-08-02
Citations: 536 F. App'x 692
Docket Number: No. 12-10166
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin ACEVEDO-VAZQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 536
Pages: 692–693

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Agustin ACEVEDO-VAZQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-10166.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 24, 2013.
Filed Aug. 2, 2013.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Thomas E. Higgins, Esquire, Law Offices of Thomas E. Higgins Jr., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Agustín Acevedo-Vasquez, pro se.
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, 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
Agustín Acevedo-Vazquez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for reentry after 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), Acevedo-Vazquez'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 Acevedo-Vazquez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Acevedo-Vazquez has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. 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 waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. 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.