                                                                           FILED
                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            JAN 02 2013

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                     U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS




                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 11-10661

                Plaintiff - Appellee,            D.C. No. 4:11-cr-02074-DCB

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
MARCIAL GUARDADO-SIVIRIAN,

                Defendant - Appellant.



                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                              for the District of Arizona
                     Mark W. Bennett, District Judge, Presiding **

                           Submitted December 19, 2012 ***

Before:         GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

       Marcial Guardado-Sivirian appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 41-month sentence for reentry after


          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

          **
            The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the
Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.
          ***
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), Guardado-Sivirian’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no

grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have

provided Guardado-Sivirian with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental

brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

      Guardado-Sivirian has 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                                    11-10661
