United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 05-1354
                                    ___________

United States of America,                *
                                         *
                   Appellee,             * Appeal from the United States
                                         * District Court for the District
      v.                                 * of Nebraska.
                                         *
Hugo Segura-Gomez,                       *      [UNPUBLISHED]
                                         *
                   Appellant.            *
                                    ___________

                               Submitted: April 18, 2006
                                  Filed: April 19, 2006
                                   ___________

Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

      Hugo Segura-Gomez appeals the 120-month prison sentence the district court*
imposed after Segura-Gomez pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy charge. On appeal,
counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 

(1967).

       To the extent the Anders brief can be read to challenge the imposition of a
statutory mandatory minimum sentence, Gomez’s argument fails. See United States

      *
        The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska.
v. Chacon, 

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

,
641 (8th Cir. 1989) (mandatory minimum sentencing does not violate defendant’s
constitutional rights).

      Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 

, 80 (1988), we
conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
judgment and grant counsel leave to withdraw.
                       ______________________________




                                         -2-