United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 03-1002
                                   ___________

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Kenneth Alan Dudley,                    *      [UNPUBLISHED]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

                         Submitted: July 16, 2003
                             Filed: July 21, 2003
                                  ___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, MURPHY, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
                             ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Kenneth Dudley pleaded guilty to one count of distributing approximately
31.48 grams of a mixture or substance containing cocaine base, in violation of 21
U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B). At sentencing, the district court1 denied Dudley’s
motion for downward departure and sentenced him to 57 months imprisonment and
4 years supervised release. The court also ordered Dudley to pay $3,450 in
restitution. On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders


      1
      The HONORABLE LINDA R. READE, United States District Judge for the
Northern District of Iowa.
v. California, 

(1967), arguing that the district court abused its discretion
in denying a downward departure. We reject this argument.

      Specifically, we do not review a sentencing court’s denial of a downward-
departure motion where, as here, there is no indication the court believed it lacked the
authority to depart. See United States v. Lopez-Arce, 

, 783-84 (8th Cir.
2001). Further, we have reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio,

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

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

      A true copy.

             Attest:

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




                                           -2-