
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arnulfo Barajas OCAMPO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-10264.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 6, 2006 .
    Filed Nov. 14, 2006.
    Beverly Wee Sameshima, AUSA, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Donna M. Gray, AFPD, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: LEAVY, McKEOWN and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Arnulfo Barajas Ocampo appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 135-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ocampo’s counsel has filed a brief stating 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     