United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-1934 ___________

United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. Leobardo Urista-Coronado, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * ___________

Submitted: December 5, 1997 Filed: December 29, 1997 ___________

Before LOKEN, HEANEY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Leobardo Urista-Coronado pleaded guilty to unlawfully reentering the United States without the permission of the United States Attorney General, after having been previously convicted of a felony and deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). The district court1 sentenced Urista-Coronado at the bottom of the applicable Guidelines range to 77 months imprisonment, to be followed by two years supervised

1 The HONORABLE R. E. LONGSTAFF, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. release. In this appeal counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising a sentencing error. We affirm.

At sentencing, Urista-Coronado asked the court to depart downward from the Guidelines range by two levels on the basis that he agreed to be deported, and that he would suffer “collateral consequences” during imprisonment as a result of his alien status. The government resisted any departure. After expressing concern that Urista- Coronado had been deported three times before, and especially that he had a history of violence and criminal conduct, the district court denied the request for departure. Counsel argues in the Anders brief that the district court erred in refusing to depart.

We conclude the district court&s decision not to depart was an exercise of discretion, which we do not review. See United States v. Field, 110 F.3d 587, 591 (8th Cir. 1997); United States v. Payne, 81 F.3d 759, 764-65 (8th Cir. 1996). After reviewing the remaining record on appeal, we also conclude there are no other nonfrivolous issues for appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988).

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

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

-2-