
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lionel NABA-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-10124.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.
    
    Filed Oct. 20, 2006.
    Bradley Giles, USTU — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Evo A. Deconcini, U.S. Courthouse, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Enrique R. Gonzales, Esq., Nogales, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Lionel Naba-Perez, Milan, NM, pro se.
    Before: T.G. NELSON, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Lionel Naba-Perez appeals from the district court’s judgment imposing a 43-month sentence following remand under United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Naba-Perez has filed a brief stating that he finds 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 examination of the brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no grounds for relief on direct appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

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.
     