Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrell Lamar McBRIDE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-01-16
Citations: 505 F. App'x 640
Docket Number: No. 11-10646
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrell Lamar McBRIDE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 505
Pages: 640–641

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrell Lamar McBRIDE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-10646.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 15, 2013.
Filed Jan. 16, 2013.
Christina Brown, Assistant U.S., Robert Lawrence Ellman, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Michael Anthony Humphreys, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mario D. Valencia, Esquire, Mario D. Valencia, Attorney at Law, Henderson, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Terrell Lamar McBride, pro se.
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and NGUYEN, 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
Terrell Lamar McBride appeals from district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 131-month sentence for armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d); and possession, use, and carrying a firearm during, in relation to, and in furtherance of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), McBride'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 McBride the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
McBride has 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.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.