United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 06-2786
                                    ___________

United States of America,                *
                                         *
              Appellee,                  *
                                         * Appeal from the United States
         v.                              * District Court for the
                                         * Northern District of Iowa.
Ashley Lynn Springer,                    *
                                         *   [UNPUBLISHED]
              Appellant.                 *
                                    ___________

                              Submitted: June 29, 2007
                                 Filed: July 9, 2007
                                  ___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Ashley Springer appeals the 60-month prison sentence imposed by the district
     1
court after she pleaded guilty to conspiracy to manufacture and distribute crack
cocaine and to distribute powder cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and
distribution of crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) and 18
U.S.C. § 2. Acknowledging that this sentence was the statutory minimum, Springer
argues that application of the 100 to 1 ratio for quantities of powder cocaine and crack
cocaine results in an improper disparity between the Guideline ranges for the two

         1
        The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.
drugs, and she requests resentencing using the lower range produced by a 20 to 1
ratio.

       Springer’s argument is foreclosed by United States v. Spears, 

,
1176 (8th Cir. 2006) (en banc), which held that neither United States v. Booker, 

 (2005), nor 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) authorizes district courts to reject the 100
to 1 ratio mandated by Congress and reflected in the Guidelines. We conclude that
the sentence is not unreasonable. See Booker, 543 U.S. at 261-62 (standard of
review); United States v. Pamperin, 

, 824 (8th Cir. 2006) (district court,
without 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) motion by government, was without authority to impose
sentence below statutory minimum).

      Accordingly, we affirm.
                     ______________________________




                                         -2-