
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Saul VERDIN-LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 07-10589.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 16, 2009.
    
    Filed June 30, 2009.
    . Claire Kiehl Lefkowitz, Esq. Fax, Office of the U.S. Attorney Evo A. Deconcini U.S. Courthouse, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Raymond Vincent Panzarella, Law Offices of Raymond V. Panzarella, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Saul Verdin-Lopez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 37-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), Ver-din-Lopez’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable 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 is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     