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United States District Court for the District of Minnesota ____________ Submitted: May 27, 2025 Filed: May 30, 2025 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.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. ______________________________

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