
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Desiderio DUARTE-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-10443.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 14, 2013.
    
    Filed Aug. 19, 2013.
    Jane E. Mclaughlin, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Patricia A. Hubbard, Esquire, Law Office of Patricia A. Hubbard PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Desiderio Duarte-Ramirez, pro se.
    Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, 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

Desiderio Duarte-Ramirez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 30-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, 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), Duarte-Ramirez’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 Duarte-Ramirez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Duarte-Ramirez 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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     