Anthony Deloney pleaded guilty to possessing stolen firearms, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that at least one was stolen, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(j) and 924(a)(2). The district court 1 sentenced him to 100 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. On appeal, Delone/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 court erred in denying Deloney^ motion to suppress evidence and in imposing the 100-month sentence.

Counsel’s arguments fail. Delone/s guilty plea foreclosed a challenge to the ruling on his motion to suppress because the plea agreement did not preserve any right to appeal the ruling, see United States v. Limley, 510 F.3d 825, 827 (8th Cir. 2007), and the court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the 100-month sentence, which was at the bottom of the unobjected-to Guidelines range, see United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc).

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