
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. David Daniel NELSON, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 06-50204.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 22, 2007 .
    Filed Nov. 20, 2007.
    Becky S. Walker, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, Terri K. Flynn, Esq., USSDOffice of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Vicki Marolt Buchanan, Esq., Newport Beach, CA, for D efendant-App ell ant.
    David Daniel Nelson, Covina, CA, pro se.
    
      Before: B. FLETCHER, WARDLAW, 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

David Daniel Nelson appeals from his 8-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Nelson’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 an 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 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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     