Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel GARCIA-AMESQUITA, a.k.a. Juan Tomas Arias-Rivas, a.k.a. Miguel Angel Garcia-Amesguita, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-21
Citations: 476 F. App'x 682
Docket Number: No. 11-10212
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel GARCIA-AMESQUITA, a.k.a. Juan Tomas Arias-Rivas, a.k.a. Miguel Angel Garcia-Amesguita, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 476
Pages: 682–683

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel GARCIA-AMESQUITA, a.k.a. Juan Tomas Arias-Rivas, a.k.a. Miguel Angel Garcia-Amesguita, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-10212.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 15, 2012.
Filed May 21, 2012.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Thomas E. Higgins, Esquire, Law Offices of Thomas E. Higgins Jr., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, 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
Miguel Angel Garcia-Amesquita appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 18-month sentence for re-entry after deporta tion, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1826. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Garcia-Amesquita'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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.