22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T4fc,MEMORANDUM Juan Jesus Lopez-Gandara appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lopez-Gandara’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 the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. We remand the case to the district court with instructions that it strike the special conditions of supervised release on page 4 of the judgment which place various financial constraints on Lopez-Gandara because these requirements were included in the written judgment but not imposed at sentencing. See United States v. Napier, 463 F.3d 1040, 1042 (9th Cir.2006); see also United States v. Hicks, 997 F.2d 594, 597 (9th Cir.1993). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T52e,

MEMORANDUM

Juan Jesus Lopez-Gandara appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lopez-Gandara’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 the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

We remand the case to the district court with instructions that it strike the special conditions of supervised release on page 4 of the judgment which place various financial constraints on Lopez-Gandara because these requirements were included in the written judgment but not imposed at sentencing. See United States v. Napier, 463 F.3d 1040, 1042 (9th Cir.2006); see also United States v. Hicks, 997 F.2d 594, 597 (9th Cir.1993).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment.

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