Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector Raul ORTIZ-TARAZON, Sr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-11-04
Citations: 621 F. App'x 512
Docket Number: No. 14-10313
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector Raul ORTIZ-TARAZON, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 621
Pages: 512–512

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector Raul ORTIZ-TARAZON, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10313.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 2, 2015.
Filed Nov. 4, 2015.
Krissa Marie Lanham, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Tonya Jill Peterson, Esquire, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Hector Raul Ortiz-Tarazon, Sr., Big Spring, TX, pro se.
Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, 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
Hector Raul Ortizr-Tarazon, Sr. appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea convictions and concurrent 120-month sentences for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) and 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(vii) and 846. He also challenges his conviction and consecutive 60-month sentence for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)© and 2. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ortiz-Tarazon's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel. Ortiz-Tarazon has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No answering brief has been filed.
Ortiz-Tarazon has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.