Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NOE REZA-GUERRERO, a.k.a. Noe Reza Guerrero, a.k.a. Noe Guerrero-Reza, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-10-03
Citations: 540 F. App'x 779
Docket Number: No. 12-10540
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NOE REZA-GUERRERO, a.k.a. Noe Reza Guerrero, a.k.a. Noe Guerrero-Reza, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 540
Pages: 779–779

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NOE REZA-GUERRERO, a.k.a. Noe Reza Guerrero, a.k.a. Noe Guerrero-Reza, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-10540.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 24, 2013
Filed Oct. 3, 2013.
Ann L. Demarais, USTU-Offiee 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: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, 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
Noe Reza-Guerrero appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 41-month sentence for reentry after deportation, 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), Reza-Guerrero'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 Reza-Guerrero 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, 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.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.