
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rudolph Emmanuel ENGLETON, Jr., a.k.a. C-Cat, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-50064
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 17, 2017 
    
    Filed March 21, 2017
    Jean-Claude Andre, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kevin M. Lally, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Nathaniel Burke Walker, DOJ—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Rudolph Emmanuel Engleton, Jr., Pro Se
    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

Rudolph Emmanuel Engleton, Jr. appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his 48-month sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Engleton’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. 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.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     