United States v. Damion L. Davis , 231 F. App'x 518 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 06-1487
    ___________
    United States of America,            *
    *
    Appellee,                 *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                              * District Court for the
    * District of Nebraska.
    Damion L. Davis, also known as Boo, *
    *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 4, 2007
    Filed: May 11, 2007
    ___________
    Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Damion L. Davis (Davis) appeals the district court’s1 sentence of 108 months’
    imprisonment after the court granted the government’s Federal Rule of Criminal
    Procedure 35(b) motion to reduce Davis’s sentence for his post-sentencing substantial
    assistance. Davis’s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), seeking permission to withdraw and arguing Davis’s extensive cooperation
    warranted a greater reduction. Counsel’s argument is unavailing. See United States
    v. Coppedge, 
    135 F.3d 598
    , 599 (8th Cir. 1998) (per curiam) (holding a challenge to
    1
    The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, Chief Judge, United States District Court
    for the District of Nebraska.
    the extent of a sentence reduction upon the government’s Rule 35(b) motion was
    unreviewable because the appeal was not based on any criteria listed in 
    18 U.S.C. § 3742
    (a)); United States v. Haskins, 
    479 F.3d 955
    , 957 (8th Cir. 2007) (per curiam)
    (concluding the court lacks jurisdiction to consider the reasonableness of a sentence
    following a Rule 35(b) reduction; United States v. Booker, 
    543 U.S. 220
     (2005), did
    not expand § 3742(a) to include appellate review of discretionary sentencing
    reductions).
    Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    ,
    80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. We affirm, and grant counsel’s motion to
    withdraw.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-1487

Citation Numbers: 231 F. App'x 518

Judges: Magill, Melloy, Per Curiam, Riley

Filed Date: 5/11/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024