Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alejandro RAMIREZ-MATIAS, a.k.a. Cristino Solis Martinez, a.k.a. Alejandro Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-05-19
Citations: 604 F. App'x 569
Docket Number: No. 14-10287
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alejandro RAMIREZ-MATIAS, a.k.a. Cristino Solis Martinez, a.k.a. Alejandro Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 604
Pages: 569–570

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alejandro RAMIREZ-MATIAS, a.k.a. Cristino Solis Martinez, a.k.a. Alejandro Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10287.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 13, 2015.
Filed May 19, 2015.
Anthony William Church, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anders V. Rosenquist, Jr., Esquire, Ro-senquist & Associates, Anthem, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, 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
Alejandro Ramirez-Matias appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 46-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-Matias'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-Matias the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Ramirez-Matias 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.
disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.