
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilber JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-16965
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    July 25, 2006.
    William Gregory Hughes, Mobile, AL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Richard H. Loftin, Mobile, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Before BLACK, BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

William Gregory Hughes, appointed counsel for Wilber Jackson in this direct criminal appeal, has filed a motion to withdraw, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. We are unpersuaded by the argument Jackson raises in his response to counsel’s motion, as it does not raise an issue of arguable merit.

Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, Jackson’s motion for new counsel is denied as MOOT, and Jackson’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. 
      
      . Jackson suggests that he did not understand the plea agreement he signed and that his trial counsel lied to him in order to get him to sign the agreement. Our independent review reveals that the district court fully complied with the three "core concerns” of Fed. R.Crim.P. 11(b), see United States v. Quinones, 97 F.3d 473, 475 (11th Cir.1996) (discussing core concerns of Rule 11), and we have found 
        no evidence in the record of improper inducement or misrepresentation of the plea agreement.
     