
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nazario MARQUEZ-FLORES, a.k.a. Nazario Flores Marquez, a.k.a. Nazario Marquez Flores, a.k.a. Nazario Marquez-Florez, Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 16-10284, 16-10298
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted May 8, 2017 
    
    Filed May 11, 2017
    William G. Voit, Attorney, Krissa Marie Lanham, USPX — Office of the US Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Nazario Marquez-Flores, Pro Se
    Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, 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, Nazario Marquez-Flores appeals the 24-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the consecutive 18-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), Marquez-Flores’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Marquez-Flores 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief in these direct appeals.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     