Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Noel RODRIGUES-SEDANO, aka Noel Rodriguez-Sedano aka Armando Ortiz-Ayon, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-26
Citations: 192 F. App'x 609
Docket Number: No. 05-30139
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Noel RODRIGUES-SEDANO, aka Noel Rodriguez-Sedano aka Armando Ortiz —Ayon, Defendant — Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 192
Pages: 609–609

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Noel RODRIGUES-SEDANO, aka Noel Rodriguez-Sedano aka Armando Ortiz —Ayon, Defendant — Appellant.
No. 05-30139.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 24, 2006.
Filed July 26, 2006.
Stephanie Whitaker, Esq., USSP — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Eric R. Hultman, Dann and Meacham, Seattle, WA, 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
Noel Rodrigues-Sedano appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 121-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Rodrigues-Sedano has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Rodrigues-Sedano has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.
Our 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), discloses no grounds for relief.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.