Gregg McGee appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pled guilty to a felon-in-possession charge. His counsel 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 Mr. McGee’s within-Guidelines-range prison term. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court properly weighed relevant sentencing factors, and did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions; abuse of discretion occurs when district court (1) fails to consider relevant factor that should have . received significant weight, (2) gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or (3) considers only appropriate factors but in weighing those factors commits clear error of judgment; if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court may apply presumption of reasonableness). In addition, we have independently reviewed the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.