Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis FAVELA-HERNANDEZ, aka Luis Olivas-Chavez, aka Jose Luis Sanchez-Favela, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-01-07
Citations: 361 F. App'x 815
Docket Number: No. 08-10570
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis FAVELA-HERNANDEZ, aka Luis Olivas-Chavez, aka Jose Luis Sanchez-Favela, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 361
Pages: 815–815

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis FAVELA-HERNANDEZ, aka Luis Olivas-Chavez, aka Jose Luis Sanchez-Favela, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10570.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
Filed Jan. 7, 2010.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Andrea Lynn Matheson, Matheson Law Firm, P.C., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Jose Luis Favela-Hernandez, Marianna, FL, pro se.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, 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
Jose-Luis Favela-Hernandez appeals from his 71-month sentence for re-entry 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), Favela-Hernandez's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.