Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gerardo AGUILERA-ALVARADO, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-11
Citations: 389 F. App'x 573
Docket Number: No. 10-1636
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gerardo AGUILERA-ALVARADO, Appellant.
Judges: Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 389
Pages: 573–574

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Gerardo AGUILERA-ALVARADO, Appellant.
No. 10-1636.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: July 28, 2010.
Filed: Aug. 11, 2010.
Katrina E. Spencer, Kyle Evan Waters, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Appellee.
Gerardo Aguilera-Alvarado, Pollock, LA, pro se.
James Pierce, Assistant, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fayetteville, AR, for Appellant.
Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Gerardo Aguilera-Alvarado appeals the 82-month prison sentence the district court imposed after he pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the country following deportation for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). His counsel has moved 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), challenging the reasonableness of the sentence.
We conclude that the district court committed no procedural sentencing error and imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (in reviewing sentence, appellate court first ensures that district court committed no significant procedural error, then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under abuse-of-discretion standard; if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court may apply presumption of reasonableness); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir.2005) (describing abuse of discretion).
Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no non-frivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
. The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.