
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Eliseo ZAPATA-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-10021.
    D.C. No. CR-03-00573-EHC.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
    
    Decided Dec. 10, 2004.
    Michael T. Morrissey, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Gary M. Restaino, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, Alex Gonzalez, Gonzalez & Smith, Mesa, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Elíseo Zapata-Rodriguez appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 94-month sentence for illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Zapata-Rodriguez has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Zapata-Rodriguez has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief. 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     