
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Onecimo NUNEZ-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10335.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 17, 2012.
    
    Filed April 18, 2012.
    Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Thomas Frank Jacobs, Law Offices of Thomas Jacobs, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Onecimo Nunez-Rodriguez appeals his conviction by guilty plea and sentence for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), with a sentencing enhancement pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Nunez-Rodriguez’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 Nunez-Rodriguez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 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 provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     