
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Alberto RAMIREZ-BANDRICH, Appellant.
    No. 00-2675MN.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted May 31, 2001.
    Decided June 8, 2001.
    Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.
   [Not To Be Published]

PER CURIAM.

Alberto Ramirez-Bandrieh pleaded guilty to reentering the United States illegally after previously having been convicted of an aggravated felony and deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and (b)(2). The District Court departed downward and sentenced Ramirez-Band-rich to three years and ten months (forty-six months) imprisonment and three years supervised release, and he appeals. His counsel has filed a brief and has moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Although we granted Ramirez-Bandrieh permission to file a pro se supplemental brief, he has not done so.

As part of his written plea agreement, Ramirez-Bandrieh waived the right to appeal this sentence, and we conclude that the waiver was knowing and voluntary. Ramirez-B andrich was assisted by counsel and an interpreter at the change-of-plea and sentencing hearings; the Court carefully questioned him about the appeal waiver at the change-of-plea hearing, verifying that he understood it; the Court advised him of the statutory maximum penalty; and his sentence was consistent with the plea agreement. See United States v. Michelsen, 141 F.3d 867, 871-72 (8th Cir.) (holding that appeal waiver is enforceable so long as it resulted from knowing and voluntary decision), cert, denied, 525 U.S. 942, 119 S.Ct. 363, 142 L.Ed.2d 299 (1998); United States v. Greger, 98 F.3d 1080, 1081-82 (8th Cir.1996) (enforcing knowing and voluntary waiver of right to appeal sentence so long as sentence is not in conflict with negotiated plea agreement; waiver was knowing and intelligent where it was included in plea agreement and was discussed at change-of-plea hearing).

Accordingly, because Ramirez-Band-rich’s sentence was not in conflict with the plea agreement, we now specifically enforce his promise not to appeal by dismissing this appeal. See United States v. Estradar-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam). We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

A true copy. 
      
      . The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
     