
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joe ORNELAS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-50601.
    D.C. No. CR-02-00012-VAP.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 12, 2004.
    
    Decided Jan. 16, 2004.
    
      Bruce Riordan, Ronald L. Cheng, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Elizabeth A. Newman, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before BEEZER, HALL, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Joe Ornelas appeals his jury-trial conviction and 77-month sentence for bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Ornelas has filed a brief stating there are no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Ornelas has not filed a pro se supplemental brief, and the government has not filed a brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     