Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Armando REYES, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-01-20
Citations: 162 F. App'x 685
Docket Number: No. 05-1337
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Armando REYES, Appellant.
Judges: Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 162
Pages: 685–686

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Armando REYES, Appellant.
No. 05-1337.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 5, 2006.
Decided Jan. 20, 2006.
James C. Delworth, Asst. U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for Appellee.
Thomas F. Flynn, Federal Public Defender’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Armando Reyes, Troy, MO, pro se.
Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Armando Reyes pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess more than 50 kilograms of marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The district court sentenced him at the top of the advisory Guidelines range to 87 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). For the reasons discussed below, we grant counsel's motion and affirm.
Counsel argues that the sentence imposed is unreasonable under the standard of review announced in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). However, a sentence within the advisory Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable, and we conclude that Reyes has not satisfied his burden to rebut that presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.2005), cert. denied, -U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 840, 163 L.Ed.2d 715 (2005) (No. 05-7506). Of particular relevance is his lengthy criminal history, including prior convictions for possessing or trafficking escalating quantities of marijuana.
After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.
. The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.