
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andres GUZMAN-MERINO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-10461.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 14, 2013.
    
    Aug. 19, 2013.
    Heather Belt, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, Craig Howard Russell, USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Florence Bruemmer, Law Offices Of Florence M. Bruemmer, PC, Anthem, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    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

Andres Guzman-Merino appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 51-month sentence for reentry after deportation, 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), Guzman-Merino’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 Guzman-Merino 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.

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.
     