
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Xavier FRANKLIN, a.k.a. Zaybo, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-50616.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 17, 2012.
    
    Filed April 25, 2012.
    Elizabeth Carpenter, Assistant U.S., Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Angela Sanneman, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Amy Fan, Esquire, Saint Martin & Fan, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Xavier Franklin, Lompoc, CA, pro se.
    
      Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Xavier Franklin appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 240-month sentence for distribution of cocaine base in the form of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(iii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Franklin’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 Franklin the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Franklin waived his right to appeal his sentence with the exception of the court’s calculation of his criminal history category and the imposition of conditions of supervised release. 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 as to Franklin’s conviction and indicates that the appeal waiver is operative. Accordingly, we affirm Franklin’s conviction and dismiss the appeal of the sentence in part. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000). With regard to the court’s calculation of the criminal history category and its imposition of conditions of supervised release, our independent review of the record discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal, and we affirm.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

The conviction is AFFIRMED, and the appeal of the sentence is DISMISSED in part and AFFIRMED in part. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     