NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted February 22, 2012
Decided February 22, 2012
Before
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
No. 11‐1861
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appeal from the United States District
Plaintiff‐Appellee, Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.
v. No. 10‐CR‐138‐BBC‐02
CARL B. POTTS, Barbara B. Crabb,
Defendant‐Appellant. Judge.
O R D E R
Carl Potts pleaded guilty to robbery after he and two accomplices robbed a liquor
store in Wisconsin. See
18 U.S.C. § 1951. The district court sentenced him as a career
offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 to 188 months’ imprisonment, the top of the guidelines
range. Potts appeals, but his appellate counsel has concluded that the appeal is frivolous
and moves to withdraw under Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Potts did not
respond to counsel’s submission. See CIR. R. 51(b). We review only the potential issues
identified in counsel’s facially adequate brief. See United States v. Schuh,
289 F.3d 968, 973–74
(7th Cir. 2002).
Potts has not indicated that he wants his guilty plea set aside, so counsel properly
omits any discussion of the adequacy of the plea colloquy or the voluntariness of the plea.
See United States v. Knox,
287 F.3d 667, 670–72 (7th Cir. 2002).
No. 11‐1861 Page 2
Counsel does consider whether Potts could challenge his sentence as unreasonably
high. The sentence is within the properly calculated guidelines range and therefore
presumed reasonable. See Rita v. United States,
551 U.S. 338, 347 (2007); United States v.
Pillado,
656 F.3d 754, 772 (7th Cir. 2011). We are presented with no reason to set aside that
presumption here. The district court meaningfully considered the factors in
18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a), emphasizing that Pott is addicted to drugs and alcohol and that prior terms of
imprisonment failed to deter him from engaging in the dangerous crime spree that
eventually led to his conviction.
We GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.
