Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto ENRIQUEZ-VALENZUELA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-01-23
Citations: 466 F. App'x 673
Docket Number: No. 11-10144
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto ENRIQUEZ-VALENZUELA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 466
Pages: 673–674

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilberto ENRIQUEZ-VALENZUELA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-10144.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 17, 2012.
Filed Jan. 23, 2012.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Gilberto Enriquez-Valenzuela, Phoenix, AZ, pro se.
Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, 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
Gilberto Enriquez-Valenzuela appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 30-month sentence for importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952, and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(vii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Enriquez-Valenzuela's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Enriquez-Valenzuela 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.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.