
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco PENA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-30066.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 3, 2007.
    
    Filed Dec. 28, 2007.
    John C. Laing, Esq, Stephen F. Peifer, Esq, USPO-Office of the U.S. Attorney Mark 0. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Robert M. Stone, Esq, Medford, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Francisco Pena-Hernandez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 87-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Pena-Hernandez’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 the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Because Pena-Hernandez knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal and was sentenced within the terms of the plea agreement, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, appellant’s pro se motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, and this appeal is DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     