Ryan Horn directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense and a firearm offense and the district court 1 imposed a within-Guidelines-range sentence. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that Horn’s sentence is substantively unreasonable.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074, 1076-77 (8th Cir. 2012) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions). Furthermore, 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.