[Unpublished]
Omar Acosta-Ruiz appeals the within-Guidelines sentence the district court
1
imposed after he pled guilty to illegal reentry. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
Counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review, this court concludes that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence because the record reflects that it properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (appellate court first ensures no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard; abuse of discretion occurs when court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing appropriate factor); United States v. Stults, 575 F.3d 834, 849 (8th Cir. 2009) (where court makes individualized assessment based on facts presented, addressing defendants proffered information in consideration of § 3553(a) factors, sentence is not unreasonable). The court has independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.
The judgment is affirmed. Counsels motion to withdraw is granted.
FOOTNOTES
1
. The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
PER CURIAM.