Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adan Lopez CRESPO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-05-17
Citations: 518 F. App'x 551
Docket Number: No. 11-10612
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adan Lopez CRESPO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 518
Pages: 551–552

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adan Lopez CRESPO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-10612.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 14, 2013.
Filed May 17, 2013.
Paul Andrew Hemesath, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Ann Catherine McClintock, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Adan Lopez Crespo, Washington, MS, pro se.
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, 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
Adan Lopez Crespo appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 102-month sentence for conspiracy to manufacture at least 1,000 marijuana plants, 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), Lopez Crespo's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Lopez Crespo has filed a pro se supplemental brief, and the government has filed an answering brief.
Lopez Crespo 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.