
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus Santiago SOSA-ORTIZ, a.k.a. Jesus Sosa-Ortiz, Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 13-10291, 13-10292.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 25, 2014.
    
    Filed July 10, 2014.
    Mark S. Kokanovich, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Anders V. Rosenquist, Jr., Esquire, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Jesus Santiago Sosa-Ortiz, McRae, GA, pro se.
    Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated appeals, Jesus Santiago Sosa-Ortiz appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 72-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of supervised release and 8-month concurrent sentences imposed thereupon. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Sosa-Ortiz’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 Sosa-Ortiz 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal in case number 13-10291. The appeal in case number 13-10292 is moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 12- 14, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

In case number 13-10291, the judgment is AFFIRMED; in case number 13- 10292, the appeal is DISMISSED as moot. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     