NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 2 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 17-10032

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 1:15-cr-00236-LJO

v.

MEMORANDUM*

ROBERT MICHAEL NUNEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 26, 2017**

Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Robert Michael Nunez appeals from the revocation of supervised release and

the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), Nunez’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

* 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). provided Nunez 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

2 17-10032