Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan OLAYO-GUILLEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-02-01
Citations: 265 F. App'x 678
Docket Number: No. 06-50691
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan OLAYO-GUILLEN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 265
Pages: 678–678

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan OLAYO-GUILLEN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-50691.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 14, 2008.
Filed Feb. 1, 2008.
Kathryn A. Young, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Becky S. Walker, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, Denise D. Willett, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Riverside, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Before: HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Juan Olayo-Guillen appeals from his 51-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea to being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Olayo-Guillen'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 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 grounds for relief on direct appeal. Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is granted and the sentence is affirmed.
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir.2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir.2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with instructions to correct the judgment.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.