United States v. Chad Douglas Parker , 256 F. App'x 6 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 06-2887
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                 * District Court for the
    * Southern District of Iowa.
    Chad Douglas Parker,                     *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 23, 2007
    Filed: December 3, 2007
    ___________
    Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Chad Douglas Parker pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute more than 50
    grams of methamphetamine, and more than 500 grams of a methamphetamine
    mixture, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846. The district court1
    sentenced him to 340 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal,
    his counsel has moved to withdraw, filing a brief under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967). For the following reasons, we affirm, and we grant counsel leave to
    withdraw.
    1
    The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the Southern District of Iowa.
    Counsel argues that the district court erred in enhancing Parker’s sentence
    under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) for possessing a dangerous weapon, and under U.S.S.G.
    § 3B1.1(a) for playing an aggravating role in the offense. Reviewing de novo the
    district court’s application of the Guidelines and for clear error its factual findings,
    see United States v. Rodriguez, 
    484 F.3d 1006
    , 1014 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    128 S. Ct. 316
     (2007), we conclude that the court did not err in applying either enhancement.
    As to the dangerous-weapon enhancement, items used in manufacturing
    methamphetamine were found in Parker’s residence along with loaded firearms, see
    United States v. Cave, 
    293 F.3d 1077
    , 1079 (8th Cir. 2002) (evidence that weapon was
    found in same location as drugs or drug paraphernalia usually suffices); United States
    v. Payne, 
    81 F.3d 759
    , 762 (8th Cir. 1996) (constructive possession of firearm is
    sufficient); and as to the aggravating-role enhancement, the record reveals ample
    undisputed facts that more than five persons were involved in the conspiracy, and that
    Parker exercised decision-making authority over the manufacture of the
    methamphetamine and some of the participants, see U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, comment. (n.4)
    (factors); United States v. Coleman, 
    148 F.3d 897
    , 902-03 (8th Cir. 1998) (evidence
    sufficient to support leadership enhancement based on defendant’s decision-making
    authority over procurement of equipment, supplies, and chemical ingredients in
    methamphetamine-manufacturing conspiracy).
    Parker must pursue any ineffective-assistance claims in a proceeding under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
    . See United States v. Hughes, 
    330 F.3d 1068
    , 1069 (8th Cir. 2003).
    Finally, having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    , 80 (1988), we
    find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment and
    we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw on condition that counsel inform appellant
    about the procedures for filing petitions for rehearing and for certiorari.
    ______________________________
    -2-