                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 23 2019
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    19-30000

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 1:17-cr-02029-SMJ-1

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
SALVADOR RUIZ-CORTEZ,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Eastern District of Washington
                 Salvador Mendoza, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted August 19, 2019**

Before:      SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

      Salvador Ruiz-Cortez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 135-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction

for distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Ruiz-Cortez’s counsel has



      *
             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).
filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to

withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Ruiz-Cortez the opportunity to

file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief

has been filed.

       Ruiz-Cortez waived his right to appeal his 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                                    19-30000
