
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Roland COBELL, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-30147.
    D.C. No. CR-99-00012-CCL.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
    
    Decided Dec. 8, 2004.
    Joshua A. Vandewetering, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michael Donahoe, Esq., Federal Defenders of Montana, Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Roland Cobell appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and imposing a sentence upon revocation of 20 months imprisonment followed by 40 months of supervised release.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Cobell’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No supplemental pro se brief was filed and the government did not file a brief.

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 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 may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     