
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin HERNANDEZ-CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-10050.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 14, 2009.
    
    Filed July 23, 2009.
    Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Martin Hernandez-Cruz, Florence, AZ, pro se.
    Mark Willimann, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Martin Hernandez-Cruz appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 62-month sentence for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Hernandez-Cruz’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     