
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario ROBLES, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-10149
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted February 10, 2017 
    
    Filed February 15, 2017
    
      Tracy Van Buskirk, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Krissa Marie Lanham, USPX— Office of the US Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Mario Robles, Jr., Pro Se
    Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Mario Robles, Jr. appeals from the appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 137-month sentence for voluntary manslaughter, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1152 and 1112. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Robles’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 Robles the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

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

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     