Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto HERNANDEZ-MONDRAGON, aka Roberto Mondragon-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-02-29
Citations: 470 F. App'x 545
Docket Number: No. 10-10590
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto HERNANDEZ-MONDRAGON, aka Roberto Mondragon-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 470
Pages: 545–546

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto HERNANDEZ-MONDRAGON, aka Roberto Mondragon-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-10590.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 21, 2012.
Filed Feb. 29, 2012.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Ramiro Flores, Jr., Flores & Haywood, PLLC, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Roberto Hernandez-Mondragon, pro se.
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN and BYBEE, 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
Roberto Hernandez-Mondragon appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States after having been previously removed, 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), Hernandez-Mondragon'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. We dismiss 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.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.