• William Rose directly appeals after he pled guilty to a federal child-pornography charge and the district court 1 sentenced him below the calculated Guidelines range to eighteen months in prison. His 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), challenging the substantive reasonableness of Rose’s sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court properly weighed the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Rose. See United States v. Franik, 687 F.3d 988, 990 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review); see also United States v. Lazarski, 560 F.3d 731, 733 (8th Cir. 2009). Further, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

The judgment is affirmed, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.