Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos JACOBO-IBARRA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-08-16
Citations: 447 F. App'x 820
Docket Number: No. 10-30145
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos JACOBO-IBARRA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 447
Pages: 820–820

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Carlos JACOBO-IBARRA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-30145.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 11, 2011.
Filed Aug. 16, 2011.
Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Assistant U.S., John C. Odell, Special Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Suzanne Lee Elliott, Esquire, Law Offices of Suzanne Lee Elliott, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Juan Carlos Jacobo-Ibarra, pro se.
Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, 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
Juan Carlos Jacobo-Ibarra appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and sentence of 23 months and one week for unlawful entry by eluding examination and inspection by immigration officers, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(2). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Jacobo-Ibarra'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 as to the defendant'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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.