
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank Calaway WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-10437.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.
    
    Filed Oct. 18, 2006.
    Alan Hechtkopf, Attorney, Larry J. Wszalek, Esq., Brian D. Galle, Esq., Mark T. Odulio, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michele R. Moretti, Esq., Lake Butler, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: T.G. NELSON, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Frank Calaway Williams appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 27-month sentence imposed for two counts of aiding and assisting in the preparation and presentation of false and fraudulent income tax returns for tax year 2000, in violation of 26 U. S.C. § 7206(2).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Williams has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Because our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), indicates that Williams knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal and was sentenced within the terms of the plea agreement, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that an appeal waiver is valid when it is entered knowingly and voluntarily); see also United States v. Cardenas, 405 F.3d 1046, 1048 (9th Cir. 2005) (noting that the changes in sentencing law imposed by United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), did not render waiver of appeal involuntary and unknowing).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     