Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javier RODRIGUEZ-ORTEGA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-17
Citations: 58 F. App'x 740
Docket Number: No. 02-10097; D.C. No. CR-01-00948-MHM
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Javier RODRIGUEZ-ORTEGA, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 58
Pages: 740–740

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Javier RODRIGUEZ-ORTEGA, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 02-10097.
D.C. No. CR-01-00948-MHM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 10, 2003.
Decided March 17, 2003.
Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T. G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Javier Rodriguez-Ortega appeals his conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, and sentence for illegal re-entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) with a sentencing enhancement pursuant to 8 U. S.C. § 1326(b)(2).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Rodriguez-Ortega's counsel has filed a brief stating that he finds no meritorious issues for review, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Our examination of the briefs and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), indicates that Rodriguez-Ortega knowingly and voluntarily waived his statutory right to appeal, and was sentenced within the terms of the plea agreement. Accordingly, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1183 (9th Cir .2000).
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.