
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Alejandro SAUCEDO-VIRGEN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-50312.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
    
    Filed Dec. 11, 2009.
    Lawrence Casper, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the Ú.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Paul W. Blake, Esquire, Law Offices of Lee Plummer, Bonita, CA, Alejandro Sau-cedo-Virgen, California City, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Alejandro Saucedo-Virgen appeals from his jury-trial conviction and six concurrent 60-month sentences for bringing in illegal aliens for financial gain, and aiding and abetting, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii), and 18 U.S.C. § 2, and bringing in illegal aliens without presentation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a) (2) (B) (iii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Saucedo-Virgen’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 with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or 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, 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.
     