
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yoan Campos BORJORQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-30020.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Dec. 9, 2014.
    
    Filed Dec. 17, 2014.
    Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Vincent Thomas Lombardi, II, Esquire, Assistant U.S., J. Tate London, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jerald Lee Brainin, Esquire, Los Ange-les, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously-concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Yoan Campos Borjorquez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Borjorquez’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 Borjorquez 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 as to Borjorquez’s conviction. We accordingly affirm Borjorquez’s conviction.

Borjorquez waived the right to appeal his sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the sentencing waiver, we dismiss Borjor-quez’s appeal as to his sentence. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009).

We remand to the district court with instructions to correct the judgment to reflect that Borjorquez was convicted of violating 21 U.S.C. § 846.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part; REMANDED to correct the judgment. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     