Case Name: UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus Gonzalo HERNAND-EZDURAZO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-27
Citations: 192 F. App'x 703
Docket Number: No. 05-10302
Parties: UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Jesus Gonzalo HERNANDEZDURAZO, Defendant— Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 192
Pages: 703–704

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Jesus Gonzalo HERNANDEZDURAZO, Defendant— Appellant.
No. 05-10302.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 24, 2006.
Decided July 27, 2006.
Eric J. Markovich, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney Evo A. Deeoncini U.S. Courthouse, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Matthew Davidson, Esq., Nogales, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jesus Gonzalo Hernandez-Durazo appeals from the district court's judgment and 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute less than 50 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(D).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Hernandez-Durazo's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Hernandez-Durazo filed a pro se supplemental brief. The Government did not file an answering brief.
We have reviewed the briefs and conducted an independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and we dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000) (appeal waiver valid when entered into knowingly and voluntarily).
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the cotarts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.