Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Julio RAMIREZ-GALICIA, a.k.a. Julio Gonzales Ramirez, a.k.a. Hector Ramirez, a.k.a. Julio Ramirez-Gonzalez, for Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-29
Citations: 609 F. App'x 407
Docket Number: No. 14-10273
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Julio RAMIREZ-GALICIA, a.k.a. Julio Gonzales Ramirez, a.k.a. Hector Ramirez, a.k.a. Julio Ramirez-Gonzalez, for Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 609
Pages: 407–407

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Julio RAMIREZ-GALICIA, a.k.a. Julio Gonzales Ramirez, a.k.a. Hector Ramirez, a.k.a. Julio Ramirez-Gonzalez, for Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10273.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 22, 2015.
Filed June 29, 2015.
Krissa Marie Lanham, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anders V. Rosenquist, Jr., Esquire, Ro-senquist & Associates, Anthem, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Julio Ramirez-Galicia, Big Spring, TX, pro se.
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, 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
Julio Ramirez-Galicia appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ramirez-Galicia'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 Ramirez-Galicia the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Ramirez-Galicia has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.
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.