Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angel M. MELENDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-02
Citations: 390 F. App'x 734
Docket Number: No. 09-50273
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angel M. MELENDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 390
Pages: 734–735

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angel M. MELENDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-50273.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 19, 2010.
Filed Aug. 2, 2010.
Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Wendy T. Wu, Assistant U.S., Central District of California, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jerald Lee Brainin, Esquire, Los Ange-les, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Angel M. Melendez, Safford, AZ, pro se.
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, 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
Angel M. Melendez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for false statement in a loan application, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014, and aggravated identify theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Melendez'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 Melendez 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 as to Melendez's conviction. We dismiss the appeal of the sentence in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000).
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
The conviction is AFFIRMED, and the appeal of the sentence is DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.