Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Joel GONZALEZ-VENEGAS, a.k.a. Jose Gonzalez-Venegas, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-02-24
Citations: 594 F. App'x 347
Docket Number: No. 14-10006
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Joel GONZALEZ-VENEGAS, a.k.a. Jose Gonzalez-Venegas, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 594
Pages: 347–348

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Joel GONZALEZ-VENEGAS, a.k.a. Jose Gonzalez-Venegas, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10006.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 17, 2015.
Filed Feb. 24, 2015.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., United States District Court, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Steven D. West, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Jose Joel Gonzalez-Venegas, pro se.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, 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
Jose Joel Gonzalez-Venegas appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for attempted reentry after 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), Gonzalez-Venegas'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 Gonzalez-Venegas the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Gonzalez-Venegas 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.