Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Benjamin Joshu LOWENSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-11-23
Citations: 623 F. App'x 362
Docket Number: No. 14-10044
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Benjamin Joshu LOWENSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 623
Pages: 362–362

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Benjamin Joshu LOWENSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10044.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 18, 2015.
Filed Nov. 23, 2015.
Mark S. Kokanovich, Monica N. Edel-stein, Assistant U.S., Theresa Cole Rassas, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
Benjamin Joshu Lowenstein, pro se.
Tara Kristine Hoveland, South Lake Tahoe, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, 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
Benjamin Joshu Lowenstein appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute a mixture or substance containing a controlled substance analogue, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lowenstein'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 Lowenstein the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Lowenstein waived his right to appeal his 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.