United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 06-4031
                                    ___________

United States of America,                *
                                         *
             Appellee,                   *
                                         * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                 * District Court for the
                                         * District of Nebraska.
Rafael Bernal-Gonzalez,                  *
                                         *      [UNPUBLISHED]
             Appellant.                  *
                                    ___________

                              Submitted: October 5, 2007
                                 Filed: November 7, 2007
                                  ___________

Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Rafael Bernal-Gonzalez appeals the 87-month sentence the district court1
imposed upon his guilty plea to a drug offense, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),
(b)(1), and 846. Bernal-Gonzalez’s counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.
California, 

(1967), and moves to withdraw. For reversal, he argues that
Bernal-Gonzalez’s sentence, which was imposed at the bottom of the uncontested
Guidelines range, is unreasonable.



      1
        The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska.
       We review Bernal-Gonzalez’s sentence for reasonableness, and given that it
falls within the advisory Guidelines range, it is presumptively reasonable. See Rita
v. United States, 

, 2462 (2007) (discussing presumption). We see no
basis in the record for concluding that Bernal-Gonzalez’s sentence is unreasonable,
see United States v. Haack, 

, 1003-04 (8th Cir. 2005) (factors); and
further, after reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 

(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm, and
we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
                        ______________________________




                                        -2-