Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Alfredo FLORES-SILVA, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-12-07
Citations: 440 F. App'x 515
Docket Number: No. 11-2703
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Alfredo FLORES-SILVA, Appellant.
Judges: Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 440
Pages: 515–516

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Alfredo FLORES-SILVA, Appellant.
No. 11-2703.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 6, 2011.
Filed: Dec. 7, 2011.
Amy L. Jennings, Special, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kelly E. Mahoney, Maureen McGuire, Debra L. Scorpiniti, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Ap-pellee.
Chris Cooklin, Cooklin Law Office, Ames, IA, for Appellant.
Alfredo Flores-Silva, Lompoc, CA, pro se.
Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Alfredo Flores-Silva pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute at least 500 grams of a mixture and substance containing methamphetamine and at least 50 grams of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). The district court sentenced him to 108 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal, Flores-Silva's counsel moves 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), suggesting that the sentence is excessive.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court, in sentencing Flores-Silva, committed no procedural error and imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc) (in reviewing sentences, appellate court first ensures that no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under abuse-of-discretion standard, taking into account totality of circumstances; if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court may apply presumption of reasonableness). Further, having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfriv-olous issues for appeal.
Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
. The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.