
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ramona Lee EMMETT, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 06-30578.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 16, 2009.
    
    Filed July 6, 2009.
    Eric B. Wolff, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
    David A. Duke, Esq., Law Office of David A. Duke, Billings, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ramona Lee Emmett appeals from the jury-trial conviction and 12-month sentence imposed for making false statements, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a) and theft of government property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Emmett’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 with 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.

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.
     