*1 Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Juan Carlos Fuentes-Hidalgo appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 72-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, and aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Pursuant to Anders v. California , *2 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Fuentes-Hidalgo’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 Fuentes-Hidalgo the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Fuentes-Hidalgo waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson , 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
2 16-10357
[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).