
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel LEYVA-NINO, a.k.a. Miguel Nino Leyva, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10527.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 19, 2012.
    
    Filed Jan. 2, 2013.
    Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., United States District Court, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Miguel Leyva-Nino, Lompoc, CA, pro se.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Miguel Leyva-Nino appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 45-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Leyva-Nino’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 Leyva-Nino with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Leyva-Nino has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. 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 issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

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