United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 13-1246
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                                   Rebecca Miller

                      lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
                                      ____________

                      Appeal from United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Arkansas - Texarkana
                                  ____________

                          Submitted: September 19, 2013
                            Filed: September 25, 2013
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

      After a jury found Rebecca Miller guilty of several drug charges, the district
     1
court sentenced her to 188 months in prison. On appeal, we affirmed the convictions

         1
       The Honorable Harry F. Barnes, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Arkansas.
but remanded for resentencing. See United States v. Miller, 

, 707-10
(8th Cir. 2012). On remand, the district court imposed a sentence of 120 months in
prison. Miller appeals, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 

(1967), counsel argues that the court abused its discretion in imposing the sentence.2
Miller has not filed a pro se brief.

       After careful review, we affirm the sentence, because the district court
complied with our decision, see United States v. Kendall, 

, 963-64 (8th
Cir. 2007), and imposed a sentence that was stipulated to by both parties and that is
not unreasonable, see United States v. Feemster, 

, 461 (8th Cir. 2009)
(en banc). Further, we have reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio,

 (1988), and we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we
grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
                       ______________________________




      2
        We decline to consider counsel’s argument that the district court also abused
its discretion in failing to grant safety-valve relief. See United States v. Kress, 

, 373 (8th Cir. 1995) (where party could have raised issue in prior appeal but
did not, court later hearing same case need not consider matter).


                                         -2-