
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arturo GALLEGOS-DIAZ, a.k.a. Alaquin and Nahum Copado-Nieto, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-30074.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 5, 2010.
    
    Filed April 15, 2010.
    Lisca Boriehewski, Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Darwin Paul Roberts, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michael Nance, Law Office of Michael Nance, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Arturo Gallegos-Diaz, Fort Dix, NJ, pro se.
    Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Arturo Gallegos-Diaz appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 216-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Gallegos-Diaz’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 considered the claims raised by Gallegos-Diaz’s pro se letter submitted on June 19, 2009. No 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, Gallegos-Diaz’s request for appointment of new counsel is denied, 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.
     