Jerry L. Jones appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). On appeal, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and has moved to, withdraw. Counsel argues that Jones’s 37-month sentence is unreasonable because the court improperly applied an obstruction-of-justice enhancement.

We conclude that the enhancement was proper in light of Jones’s undisputed presentencing conduct, which included using drugs and faffing to appear for a court hearing to show cause why his bond should not be revoked. See United States v. Thomas, 72 F.3d 92, 93 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (whether obstruction-of-justice enhancement applies to specific conduct is reviewed de novo; affirming enhancement where, after pleading guilty and being released on bail, defendant tested positive for drugs and absconded for three months). Further, Jones fails to rebut the presumption that the sentence is reasonable. See United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.) (sentence within Guidelines range gives rise to presumption of reasonableness, which defendant must rebut), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 126 S.Ct. 840, 163 L.Ed.2d 715 (2005).

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.