United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 08-2389
                                   ___________

United States of America,               *
                                        *
            Appellee,                   *
                                        * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                * District Court for the
                                        * District of Nebraska.
Juan C. Polanco,                        *
                                        *      [UNPUBLISHED]
            Appellant.                  *
                                   ___________

                             Submitted: December 18, 2009
                                Filed: January 14, 2010
                                 ___________

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

PER CURIAM.

       Juan Polanco appeals the mandatory minimum sentence the district court1
imposed after he pleaded guilty to distributing at least 50 grams of a
methamphetamine mixture, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1) and 18
U.S.C. § 2. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders
v. California, 

(1967), arguing that Polanco’s sentence is unreasonable,
and that the government should have filed a motion to reduce his sentence based on
substantial assistance.

      1
      The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of
Nebraska.
       We find no merit in Polanco’s argument that the government should have filed
a substantial-assistance motion. See United States v. Perez, 

, 1138 (8th
Cir. 2008) (grounds on which district court may review government’s refusal to make
substantial-assistance motion). Because the court lacked discretion to impose a
sentence below the statutory minimum, we also find no merit in Polanco’s argument
that the sentence is unreasonable. See United States v. Chacon, 

, 1066
(8th Cir. 2003) (only authority for court to depart below statutory minimum sentence
is in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) and (f), which apply only when government makes motion
for substantial assistance or when defendant qualifies under safety-valve provision);
United States v. Gregg, 

, 937 (8th Cir. 2006) (United States v. Booker,

(2005), “does not relate to statutorily-imposed sentences”).

      After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 

(1988), we find no non-frivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, subject to counsel informing
appellant about procedures for seeking rehearing and filing a petition for certiorari.
                      ______________________________




                                         -2-