Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Felix VALERIO-DOMINGUEZ, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-10-12
Citations: 250 F. App'x 762
Docket Number: No. 05-4137
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Felix VALERIO-DOMINGUEZ, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 250
Pages: 762–763

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Felix VALERIO-DOMINGUEZ, Appellant.
No. 05-4137.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 3, 2007.
Filed: Oct. 12, 2007.
Claude Shackelford Hawkins, Jr., U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Appellee.
Morse U. Gist, Slagle & Gist, Hot Springs, AR, for Appellant.
Felix Valerio-Dominguez, Bentonville, AR, pro se.
Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
[UNPUBLISHED]

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Felix Valerio-Dominguez (Valerio-Dominguez) appeals the 30-month prison sentence the district court imposed after Valerio-Dominguez pled guilty to (1) reentering the United States as a previously deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326; and (2) possessing a firearm as an illegal alien, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). In a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Valerio-Dominguez's counsel seeks permission to withdraw.
We conclude the district court properly calculated Valerio-Dominguez's advisory Guidelines sentencing range and the within-Guidelines sentence is not unreasonable, because nothing in the record suggests the court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper factor, or made a clear error of judgment in imposing the sentence. See Rita v. United States, — U.S. —, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462-68, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (allowing appellate presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir.2005) (declaring the factors used to review a sentence for reasonableness). After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonffivolous issues.
We grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we affirm.
. The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.