Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ricardo SANTACRUZ-BECERILL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-01-02
Citations: 507 F. App'x 663
Docket Number: No. 11-10522
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ricardo SANTACRUZ-BECERILL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 507
Pages: 663–664

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ricardo SANTACRUZ-BECERILL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-10522.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 19, 2012.
Filed Jan. 2, 2013.
Patrick Michael Walsh, Robert Lawrence Ellman, Esquire, Adam McMeen Flake, USLV-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mario D. Valencia, Esquire, Attorney at Law, Henderson, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Ricardo Santacruz-Becerill, Safford, AZ, 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
Ricardo Santacruz-Becerill appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 151-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 841(b)(l)(A)(viii) and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Santacruz-Becerill's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Santa-cruz-Becerill has filed a pro se supplemental brief, and the government has filed an answering brief.
Santacruz-Becerill 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.