Jorge Mireles-Torres appeals the sentence imposed by the district court 1 upon his guilty plea to illegal reentry following deportation for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. *192 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief raising the issue whether Mireles-Torres’s sentence is too harsh.

At sentencing, Mireles-Torres raised no objection to the accuracy of the presentence report’s facts and Guidelines calculations, and the sentence imposed — also without objection — was at the bottom of the applicable Guidelines range. His argument on appeal is unreviewable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a); cf. United States v. Woodrum, 959 F.2d 100,101 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (sentence is not reviewable merely because it is at top of properly calculated Guidelines range).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

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

A true copy.