United States v. Timothy A. Kateusz ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 06-1654
    ___________
    United States of America,              *
    *
    Appellee,                  *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                               * District Court for the
    * Western District of Missouri.
    Timothy A. Kateusz,                    *
    *    [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 31, 2007
    Filed: June 7, 2007
    ___________
    Before COLLOTON, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    A jury found Timothy A. Kateusz guilty of conspiring to manufacture 5 grams
    or more of actual methamphetamine and attempting to manufacture 5 grams or more
    of actual methamphetamine. The district court1 imposed two concurrent sentences of
    120 months in prison and 8 years of supervised release, the statutory minimum. On
    appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), and Kateusz has filed a pro se supplemental brief.
    For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
    1
    The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western
    District of Missouri.
    First, we conclude that the district court2 did not err by crediting three police
    officers’ testimony over Kateusz’s testimony at the suppression hearing. See
    Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 
    470 U.S. 564
    , 575 (1985). Second, we conclude
    that the court did not err by imposing two $100 special assessments because Kateusz
    is serving two sentences, the imposition of which does not violate double jeopardy.
    See United States v. Boykins, 
    966 F.2d 1240
    , 1244-45 (8th Cir. 1992). Third, we
    conclude that the court did not err by applying the enhanced statutory minimum of 
    21 U.S.C. § 841
    (b)(1)(B)(viii) because it applies to the instant manufacturing offenses,
    see 
    21 U.S.C. § 841
    (a)(1), and Kateusz’s prior felony conviction for possessing a
    controlled substance is a “prior conviction for a felony drug offense,” see 
    21 U.S.C. § 841
    (b)(1)(B); United States v. Maynie, 
    257 F.3d 908
    , 919 n.5 (8th Cir. 2001).
    Fourth, we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to show that Kateusz could
    manufacture at least 5 grams of actual methamphetamine. See United States v.
    Anderson, 
    236 F.3d 427
    , 430 (8th Cir. 2001).
    Finally, after reviewing the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio,
    
    488 U.S. 75
     (1988), we conclude that there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal.
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s
    motion to withdraw.
    ______________________________
    2
    The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the
    Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendation of the
    Honorable Robert E. Larsen, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District
    of Missouri.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-1654

Judges: Beam, Benton, Colloton, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 6/7/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024