
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Brian ELTRINGHAM, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-30402.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 17, 2013.
    
    Filed Dec. 18, 2013.
    Paulette Lynn Stewart, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Helena, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Palmer A. Hoovestal, Hoovestal Law Firm, PLLC, Helena, MT, for Defendants Appellant.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Shawn Brian Eltringham, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 24-month sentence for distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), (b)(1)(C). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Eltringham’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief. We have provided Eltringham 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.

Eltringham’s request for a remand is denied. See United States v. Ruiz, 536 U.S. 622, 633, 122 S.Ct. 2450, 153 L.Ed.2d 586 (2002) (“[T]he Constitution does not require the Government to disclose material impeachment evidence prior to entering a plea agreement with a criminal defendant.”).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     