[UNPUBLISHED]

Madison Flowers appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to distributing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Flowers’s counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396,18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); Flowers has filed a pro se supplemental brief.

We reject the arguments raised on appeal. A codefendant’s lesser sentence is not sufficient reason for setting aside Flowers’s sentence. See United States v. Pirani 406 F.3d 543, 549 (8th Cir.) (en banc) (plain-error standard of review for unpreserved error), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 126 S.Ct. 266, — L.Ed.2d — (2005); United States v. Buckendahl, 251 F.3d 753, 758-59 (8th Cir.) (noting that sentencing disparities between coconspirators do not serve as proper basis for sentence reduction), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1049, 122 S.Ct. 633, 151 L.Ed.2d 553 (2001). Any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel should be raised in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. See United States v. Hughes, 330 F.3d 1068, 1069 (8th Cir. 2003).

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 conclude that there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district *252 court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.