
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mauricio ROSALES-GONZALEZ, also known as Chaparro; et al., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-30062.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 26, 2008 .
    Filed Sept. 9, 2008.
    Helen J. Brunner, Esq., Todd L. Green-berg, Esq., USSE — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Suzanne Lee Elliott, Esq., Law Offices of Suzanne Lee Elliott, Mark A. Larrana-ga, Esq., Walsh & Larranaga, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Mauricio Rosales-Gonzalez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 70-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) and 846.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Rosales-Gonzalez’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no arguable grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant 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.
     