United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                     ___________

                                     No. 07-1507
                                     ___________

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                                          *      [UNPUBLISHED]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

                               Submitted: April 29, 2008
                                  Filed: May 2, 2008
                                   ___________

Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

       In this direct criminal appeal, Emmanuel Herron (Herron) challenges the district
court’s1 judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding Herron guilty of drug and
firearm offenses. Herron’s counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under
Anders v. California, 

(1967), challenging the admission of evidence
derived from a warrantless entry. Because Herron did not file a motion to suppress
in the district court, we are “not in a position to intelligently and responsibly” conduct
plain error review of the matter. See United States v. Wenner, 

, 981-82

      1
        The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.
(8th Cir. 1969) (refusing to consider a Fourth Amendment argument asserted for first
time on appeal; noting the plain error rule should be applied with caution, not
liberally, and should be invoked only to avoid a clear miscarriage of justice).

      Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 

,
80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

      We affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw.
                      ______________________________




                                        -2-