Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marco Antonio Gamboa GUZMAN, a.k.a. Pedro Rodriguez Flores, a.k.a. Marco Gamboa, a.k.a. Tony Gamboa, a.k.a. Daniel Garcia Guzman, a.k.a. Javier Gomez Mendez, a.k.a. Pedro Quintana Mora, a.k.a. Pedro Mora Quintana, a.k.a. Daniel Dadena Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-22
Citations: 516 F. App'x 660
Docket Number: No. 11-50461
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marco Antonio Gamboa GUZMAN, a.k.a. Pedro Rodriguez Flores, a.k.a. Marco Gamboa, a.k.a. Tony Gamboa, a.k.a. Daniel Garcia Guzman, a.k.a. Javier Gomez Mendez, a.k.a. Pedro Quintana Mora, a.k.a. Pedro Mora Quintana, a.k.a. Daniel Dadena Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 516
Pages: 660–661

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marco Antonio Gamboa GUZMAN, a.k.a. Pedro Rodriguez Flores, a.k.a. Marco Gamboa, a.k.a. Tony Gamboa, a.k.a. Daniel Garcia Guzman, a.k.a. Javier Gomez Mendez, a.k.a. Pedro Quintana Mora, a.k.a. Pedro Mora Quintana, a.k.a. Daniel Dadena Rodriguez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-50461.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 16, 2013.
Filed April 22, 2013.
Marco Antonio Gamboa Guzman, Ade-lanto, CA, pro se.
Elizabeth Newman, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, 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
Marco Antonio Gamboa Guzman appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 63-month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States following 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), Gamboa Guzman'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 Gamboa Guzman 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.