
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Indalecio CASTRO-PONCE, a.k.a. Chito, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-10164.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 24, 2016.
    
    Filed Feb. 29, 2016.
    Krissa Marie Lanham, William Harry Bryan, III, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Douglas Erickson, Maynard Cronin Erickson Curran & Sparks, PLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Indalecio Castro-Ponce appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 216-month sentence imposed upon resentencing, following his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(l)(A)(viii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Castro-Ponce’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Castro-Ponce has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No 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. We do not consider Castro-Ponce’s pro se challenges to his conviction, which was previously affirmed by this court. See United States v. Castro-Ponce, 585 Fed.Appx. 576 (9th Cir.2014).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

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