James Glasgow directly appeals the sentence that the district court 1 imposed upon revoking his probation. For reversal, he argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review, we conclude that the sentence — which is well within statutory limits, and is also within the Chapter 7 advisory Guidelines range applicable to revocation sentences — is not unreasonable. See United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance with United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw.