Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Esteban PARRA-REYES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-23
Citations: 517 F. App'x 567
Docket Number: Nos. 12-10139, 12-10144
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Esteban PARRA-REYES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 517
Pages: 567–568

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Esteban PARRA-REYES, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 12-10139, 12-10144.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 16, 2013.
Filed April 23, 2013.
Joan G. Ruffennach, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Esteban Parra-Reyes, Milan, NM, pro se.
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
In these consolidated appeals, Esteban Parra-Reyes appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 63-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326; and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive seven-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Parra-Reyes'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 Parra-Reyes the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Parra-Reyes has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and his right to challenge the revocation of supervised release and the sentence imposed upon revocation. 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 appeals. 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.