
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel BELTRAN-MARQUEZ, d.b.a. Trinidad Romero Atondo, a.k.a. Ignacio Martinez-Chavez, a.k.a. Polo, Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 12-30223, 12-30225.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 24, 2013.
    
    Filed Oct. 3, 2013.
    Anthony G. Hall, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney Boise, ID, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      J. Justin Blewitt, Jr., Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Scranton, PA, Mark E. Morrison, Esq. Office of United States Attorney, Harrisburg, PA, United States Attorney Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Office of United States Attorney, Philadelphia, PA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated appeals, Miguel Beltran-Marquez appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 188-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A); and the revocation of supervised release and concurrent 18-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Beltran-Marquez’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Beltran-Marquez has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No answering brief has been filed.

Beltran-Marquez has waived his right to appeal his conspiracy conviction and 188-month sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver, we dismiss Appeal No. 12-30223. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009).

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief with respect to the revocation of supervised release or the sentence imposed upon revocation. We therefore affirm the judgment challenged in Appeal No. 12-30225.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

Beltran-Marquez’s pro se motions to strike the Anders brief and appoint substitute counsel are DENIED. To the extent Beltran-Marquez is seeking appointment of counsel to collaterally attack his conviction and sentence, he may make that request in connection with any 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion that he files.

Appeal No. 12-30223 DISMISSED; Appeal No. 12-30225 AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     