
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel TRANO-CASTRO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-10656.
    D.C. No. CR-98-00456-RCB.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 14, 2003.
    
    Decided Oct. 17, 2003.
    Joan G. Ruffennach, Esq., Michael Thomas Morrissey, Esq., USPX—Office Of The U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Joel Trano-Castro, Reg# 38958-008, Florence, AZ, pro se.
    Marc J. Victor, Esq., Mesa, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before WARDLAW, BERZON and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Joel Trano-Castro appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and imposing a 12-month sentence upon revocation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Trano-Castro’s counsel has submitted a brief stating that he has found no meritorious issues for review. Appellant did not file a supplemental pro se brief, nor did the government file a brief.

Our consideration of counsel's brief and our independent review of the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no issues requiring further review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s order 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.
     