United States v. Gregory Anderson ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 05-3217
    ___________
    United States of America,                 *
    *
    Appellee,             * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the District
    v.                                  * of Minnesota.
    *
    Gregory Anderson,                         *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.            *
    ___________
    Submitted: March 14, 2006
    Filed: March 20, 2006
    ___________
    Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    A jury convicted Gregory Anderson of robbing three banks in the Twin Cities.
    At a post-Booker resentencing, the district court* sentenced Anderson at the low end
    of the advisory guidelines range to 210 months in prison.
    On appeal, Anderson first challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting
    his convictions, asserting the evidence is unreliable eyewitness testimony. Viewing
    the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude a reasonable jury
    *
    The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Court for the District
    of Minnesota.
    could have found Anderson guilty of the three robberies beyond a reasonable doubt.
    See United States v. Hollins, 
    432 F.3d 809
    , 811 (8th Cir. 2005). The surveillance tape
    of each bank robbery shows the same man, identified as Anderson, robbing each of
    the three banks. A police detective recognized the person in the tape as Anderson
    from earlier experiences with him. Further, each of the three victim tellers positively
    identified Anderson as the person who robbed them.
    Anderson also challenges his sentence. Anderson argues the jury, not the court,
    should have decided whether his earlier convictions qualified as crimes of violence
    for sentencing purposes. As Anderson acknowledges, this argument is contrary to our
    precedents. See United States v. Carrillo-Beltran, 
    424 F.3d 845
    , 848 (8th Cir. 2005);
    United States v. Wilson, 
    406 F.3d 1074
    , 1075 (8th Cir. 2005); United States v.
    Marcussen, 
    403 F.3d 982
    , 984 (8th Cir. 2005). Anderson asserts these cases are
    wrongly decided, but one panel of this court cannot overturn the decisions of other
    panels. See United States v. Hutman, 
    339 F.3d 773
    , 777 (8th Cir. 2003). Anderson
    also contends his sentence is unreasonable. We disagree. Because Anderson’s
    sentence is within the advisory guidelines range, we presume it is reasonable. United
    States v. Davidson, No. 05-2380, 
    2006 WL 300532
    , at *3 (8th Cir. Feb. 9, 2006).
    Anderson has failed to overcome the presumption. See 
    id.
     The district court
    considered all of the factors in 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) before concluding a sentence of
    210 months was appropriate. Having carefully reviewed the record, we agree the
    sentence is reasonable given the severity of the robbery offenses and Anderson’s
    lengthy criminal history. See Marcussen, 
    403 F.3d at 985
    .
    We thus affirm the district court.
    ______________________________
    -2-