United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-1440 ___________________________

United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Jaime Alejandro Aguirre-Rea

Defendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota ____________

Submitted: May 27, 2025 Filed: May 30, 2025 [Unpublished] ____________

Before SMITH, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Four years into a 150-month sentence for conspiring to distribute methamphetamine, see 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846, Jaime Aguirre-Rea requested a sentence reduction, see 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Both a pro se supplemental brief and his counsel, who seeks permission to withdraw, suggest that the district court 1 failed to properly explain why he did not receive one.

We conclude otherwise. The district court found Aguirre-Rea eligible and calculated the new recommended sentencing range, but denied a reduction because of “his involvement in the conspiracy and the severity of his criminal conduct.” See United States v. Alaniz, 961 F.3d 998, 1000 (8th Cir. 2020) (per curiam) (reviewing for an abuse of discretion). In doing so, it “was aware of the relevant factors,” sufficiently considered them, and did not rely on an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment. United States v. Rodd, 966 F.3d 740, 748 (8th Cir. 2020) (citation omitted); see id. (explaining that “disagree[ment] with how the district court balanced the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) factors . . . is not a sufficient ground for reversal” (citation omitted)). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. -2-