United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 12-3926
                         ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                                  Ana Vaca-Gomez

                       lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
                                       ____________

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

                          Submitted: September 30, 2013
                             Filed: October 7, 2013
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

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

PER CURIAM.

     Ana Vaca-Gomez pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the distribution of actual
methamphetamine, and the district court1 sentenced her to 87 months in prison and 4


      1
      The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Arkansas.
years of supervised release. On appeal, her counsel has moved to withdraw, and in
a brief filed under Anders v. California, 

 (1967), counsel raises as issues
(1) whether the sentence is excessive and unfair, and (2) whether Vaca-Gomez’s
proffer interviews with the government should have resulted in a motion for a
downward departure based on substantial assistance. In his motion to withdraw,
counsel states that Vaca-Gomez believes that counsel rendered ineffective assistance.

       To the extent Vaca-Gomez raises a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,
we decline to consider it in this direct criminal appeal. See United States v. McAdory,

, 872-73 (8th Cir. 2007). We also reject the argument that the district
court’s sentence was excessive and unfair, see United States v. Feemster, 

, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc), and we find no basis in the record to conclude that
the lack of a substantial-assistance departure motion in this case is a basis to challenge
the sentence imposed, see United States v. Wolf, 

, 1190 (8th Cir. 2001).

       Last, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 

, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                        ______________________________




                                           -2-