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:T46d,MEMORANDUM Jaime Juarez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his jury-trial conviction and 84-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 892.60 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(vii); and 846; and possession with intent to distribute 892.60 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and (b)(l)(B)(vii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Juarez’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 Juarez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T49f,

MEMORANDUM

Jaime Juarez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his jury-trial conviction and 84-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 892.60 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(vii); and 846; and possession with intent to distribute 892.60 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and (b)(l)(B)(vii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Juarez’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 Juarez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

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