James Poe appeals the 12-month prison term the district court1 imposed upon revoking his supervised release. We con-*650elude that the revocation sentence, which is within both the statutory limit and the advisory Guidelines range, is not unreasonable. See United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir.2005) (per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance with United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) (factors to be considered before revoking supervised release and imposing sentence; limit on revocation sentence for Class C and D felonies); United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110-11 (8th Cir.2008) (district court need not make specific findings where record shows court was aware of relevant factors; on appeal, revocation sentence within Guidelines range is accorded presumption of reasonableness).
Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.