United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   _____________

                                    No. 99-1124SI
                                   _____________

United States of America,                *
                                         * On Appeal from the United
             Appellee,                   * States District Court
                                         * for the Southern District
      v.                                 * of Iowa.
                                         *
Hilario Avila,                           * [Not To Be Published]
                                         *
             Appellant.                  *
                                    ___________

                            Submitted: January 4, 2000
                                Filed: January 25, 2000
                                    ___________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.


      Hilario Avila appeals from the final judgment of the District Court1 after he
pleaded guilty to a one-count indictment for possession with intent to distribute
methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a). On appeal, counsel filed a brief
pursuant to Anders v. California, 

(1967), suggesting the District Court




      1
        The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern
District of Iowa.
erred in not granting Avila a downward departure, and in imposing a 2-level
obstruction-of-justice enhancement.

       We conclude the District Court’s refusal to depart downward is unreviewable,
because its statements, taken as a whole, indicate it was aware of its authority to depart
downward and it exercised its discretion not to do so. See United States v. Knight, 

, 311 (8th Cir. 1996). We further conclude the District Court did not err in
imposing a 2-level sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice, because Avila’s
fear for his safety does not excuse the fact that he eluded authorities for over a year.
See U. S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3C1.1 (1998); United States v. Taylor, 

, 1559-60 (D.C. Cir. 1993); United States v. Lyon, 

, 707 (8th
Cir. 1992).

       In accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 

, 80 (1988), we have reviewed
the record for any nonfrivolous issues and have found none. We grant counsel’s
motion to withdraw.

      Accordingly, we affirm.

      A true copy.

             Attest:

                     CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                           -2-