United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 02-1585
                                   ___________

United States of America,             *
                                      *
            Appellee,                 *
                                      * Appeal from the United States
      v.                              * District Court for the
                                      * Northern District of Iowa.
Rafael Garcia-Zuniga, also known as   *
Robert Farias, also known as Zuniga   *      [UNPUBLISHED]
Erasmo Rodriguez,                     *
                                      *
            Appellant.                *
                                 ___________

                          Submitted: June 11, 2002
                              Filed: June 20, 2002
                                   ___________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Rafael Garcia-Zuniga pleaded guilty to re-entering the United States illegally
after deportation, following his conviction for an aggravated felony, in violation of
8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) and (b). The district court1 departed upward, finding that Garcia-
Zuniga’s criminal history was underrepresented, and sentenced him to 68 months
imprisonment and 2 years supervised release. On appeal, counsel has moved to


      1
       The HONORABLE MARK W. BENNETT, Chief Judge, United States
District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
withdraw under Anders v. California, 

(1967), and has filed a brief
arguing that the district court erred in departing upward.

       The district court did not abuse its discretion by departing upward. See United
States v. Levi, 

, 679 (8th Cir. 2000). It properly considered Garcia-
Zuniga’s past charged and uncharged conduct, as outlined in the unobjected-to
presentence report. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3; 

; United States v.
Beatty, 

, 690 (8th Cir. 1993); United States v. Davila, 

, 784-
85 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 

(1992). Further, following our independent
review, see Penson v. Ohio, 

(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

      Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

      A true copy.

             Attest:

                     CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                         -2-