
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ray Darnell WEBB, a.k.a. Reno, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-10228.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 29, 2015.
    
    Filed April 13, 2015.
    Nicholas Dana Dickinson, Phillip Nelson Smith, Jr., Assistant U.S., USLV-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USRE-Office of the U.S. Attorney Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Todd M. Leventhal, Esquire, Special Counsel, Leventhal And Associates, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ray Darnell Webb appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 96-month sentence for coercion and enticement, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Webb’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Webb the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Webb has waived his right to appeal his conviction. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of that waiver, we dismiss the appeal of Webb’s conviction. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009).

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief with respect to the sentence. We therefore affirm the sentence.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED in part; AFFIRMED in part. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     