
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Noe HERNANDEZ-ROMERO, Appellant.
    No. 07-3355.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 31, 2009.
    Filed: April 10, 2009.
    
      Kimberly C. Bunjer, U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Nebraska, Omaha, NE, for Appellee.
    Dana C. Bradford, III, Bradford & Coe-nen, Omaha, NE, Appellant.
    Noe Hernandez-Romero, Pine Prairie, LA, pro se.
    Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Noe Hernandez-Romero pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute at least 500 grams of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846. The district court imposed a 70-month prison term and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal, Hernandez-Romero’s counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the prison sentence is unreasonable.

We conclude that the sentence, which was at the bottom of the advisory Guidelines range, is not unreasonable. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007); United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.2005). The district court considered relevant factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and nothing in the record suggests that the court misapplied those factors. See United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir.2005).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw on condition that counsel inform appellant about the procedures for filing petitions for rehearing and for certiorari. 
      
      . The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.
     