United States v. Lucas McNulty-Snodgrass ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 22-1067
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Lucas Michael McNulty-Snodgrass
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern
    ____________
    Submitted: July 1, 2022
    Filed: July 18, 2022
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Lucas McNulty-Snodgrass received a 210-month prison sentence after he
    pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine, 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1),
    846, and being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition, 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g). An Anders brief suggests that the sentence is substantively unreasonable.
    See Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967). A pro se brief claims that Congress
    did not have the power to enact the two statutes that Snodgrass violated. See U.S.
    Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3; United States v. Morrison, 
    529 U.S. 598
    , 616–17 (2000).
    Snodgrass’s constitutional argument is foreclosed by precedent. See Gonzales
    v. Raich, 
    545 U.S. 1
    , 9 (2005); United States v. Nash, 
    627 F.3d 693
    , 696–97 (8th
    Cir. 2010). And the substantive-reasonableness challenge is belied by the record,
    which establishes that the district court 1 sufficiently considered the statutory
    sentencing factors, 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a), and did not rely on an improper factor or
    commit a clear error of judgment. See United States v. Feemster, 
    572 F.3d 455
    , 461–
    62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc).
    Finally, we have independently reviewed the record and conclude that no
    other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    , 82–83 (1988).
    We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel
    permission to withdraw.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable John A. Jarvey, then Chief Judge, United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Iowa, now retired.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1067

Filed Date: 7/18/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 7/18/2022