Court Opinion

ID: 8680120
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-25 04:37:56.704972+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:29.657486
License: Public Domain

MEMORANDUM **
Noe Martinez Paredes appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month *582sentence for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Martinez Paredes’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 Martinez Paredes the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
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 grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid*582ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.