United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-1875 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Raymon D. Harrison

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________

Submitted: October 30, 2018 Filed: October 31, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________

Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Raymon Harrison directly appeals the within-Guidelines-range sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a

1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. firearm. Harrison’s counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of Harrison’s sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it sentenced Harrison. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461–62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (explaining that sentences, whether inside or outside the Guidelines range, are reviewed under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard). The record establishes that the district court adequately considered the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Wohlman, 651 F.3d 878, 887 (8th Cir. 2011) (explaining that a district court need not mechanically recite the section 3553(a) factors). In addition, we may presume on appeal that a sentence within the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014).

We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________

-2-