Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SEAL 1, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-04-19
Citations: 228 F. App'x 737
Docket Number: No. 06-10217
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SEAL 1, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 228
Pages: 737–738

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SEAL 1, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-10217.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 16, 2007 .
Filed April 19, 2007.
John Joseph Tuchi, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anders V. Rosenquist, Jr., Esq., Rosenquist & Associates, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Appellant appeals from her guilty-plea conviction and sentence.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), appellant's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Appellant did not file a pro se supplemental brief. The Government did not file an answering brief.
We have reviewed the briefs and conducted an independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and we dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000) (appeal waiver valid when entered into knowingly and voluntarily).
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.