United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 09-2476
                                    ___________

United States of America,                *
                                         *
             Appellee,                   * Appeal from the United States
                                         * District Court for the
      v.                                 * Eastern District of Missouri.
                                         *
Marcus Mister,                           * [UNPUBLISHED]
                                         *
             Appellant.                  *
                                    ___________

                              Submitted: January 21, 2010
                                 Filed: February 3, 2010
                                  ___________

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

PER CURIAM.

       Marcus Mister pleaded guilty to distributing a mixture or substance containing
cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), (b)(1)(C); and to aiding and abetting
the distribution of 5 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing cocaine base,
in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), (b)(1)(B) & 2. The district court1 determined
that Mister was a career offender with an advisory Guidelines range of 188-235
months in prison, but sentenced him below the range to concurrent sentences of 144
months in prison and concurrent 3- and 4-year terms of supervised release. Counsel

      1
        The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 

(1967), raising the following issues: (1) the sentence is too long; (2) Mister’s two
prior controlled-substance offenses should not have earned criminal history points or
triggered career-offender status, because the court suspended sentence in each case;
and (3) counsel was ineffective.

       These arguments are unavailing. The unobjected-to criminal history score is
not erroneous, plainly or otherwise: a conviction for which imposition or execution
of sentence is totally suspended or stayed is counted as a prior sentence under
U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(c), and therefore the prior controlled-substance offenses earned
criminal history points and also triggered career-offender status. See U.S.S.G.
§§ 4A1.2(a)(3), 4B1.1(a)&(b), 4B1.2(c); United States v. Linderman, 

,
899 (8th Cir. 2009) (plain error review for unobjected-to procedural error).

       We also conclude that the sentence is not substantively unreasonable, see
United States v. Lazarski, 

, 733 (8th Cir. 2009); and the ineffective-
assistance argument is not properly before us in this direct criminal appeal, see United
States v. McAdory, 

, 872-73 (8th Cir. 2007). Finally, having reviewed
the record under Penson v. Ohio, 

(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous
issues.

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




                                          -2-