United States v. Snofawn Torres-Webber , 627 F. App'x 584 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 15-2012
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Snofawn Torres-Webber
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
    ____________
    Submitted: December 25, 2015
    Filed: January 11, 2016
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Snofawn Torres-Webber appeals from the sentence imposed by the District
    1
    Court after she pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit robbery. Her counsel has
    1
    The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the Northern District of Iowa.
    moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), arguing that the sentence and conditions of supervised release are
    unreasonable. We conclude that the within-Guidelines sentence is not substantively
    unreasonable. United States v. Cook, 
    698 F.3d 667
    , 670 (8th Cir. 2012) (standards
    of review). Because Torres-Webber did not object to the conditions of supervised
    release at sentencing, we review only for plain error. See United States v. Simons,
    
    614 F.3d 475
    , 478 (8th Cir. 2010); see also Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b). There is no such
    error. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (noting that additional conditions of supervised release
    must be “reasonably related” to certain 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, involve “no
    greater deprivation of liberty than reasonably necessary,” and be consistent with any
    relevant Sentencing Commission policy statements). We have reviewed the record
    independently under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), and we find no nonfrivolous
    issues for appeal.
    Accordingly, we affirm the sentence, and we grant counsel’s motion to
    withdraw.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-2012

Citation Numbers: 627 F. App'x 584

Judges: Loken, Bowman, Colloton

Filed Date: 1/11/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024