United States v. Edward Jones , 584 F. App'x 290 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 14-2087
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Edward Jones
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
    ____________
    Submitted: November 19, 2014
    Filed: November 24, 2014
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Edward Jones directly appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he
    pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel moves to withdraw, and in a brief filed
    1
    The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the Northern District of Iowa.
    under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), he argues that the court abused its
    discretion in declining to vary below the advisory Guidelines range. After careful
    review, see United States v. Feemster, 
    572 F.3d 455
    , 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc)
    (appellate review of sentencing decision), we find that the court did not abuse its
    discretion in declining to grant the requested variance, see United States v. Gonzalez,
    
    573 F.3d 600
    , 608 (8th Cir. 2009) (upholding denial of motion for downward
    variance where court considered sentencing factors and properly explained rationale).
    We also conclude that the within-Guidelines-range sentence is substantively
    reasonable. See Feemster, 
    572 F.3d at 461
     (if sentence is within Guidelines range,
    appellate court may apply presumption of substantive reasonableness). Finally, after
    independently reviewing the record under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    , 80 (1988),
    we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw,
    and we affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-2087

Citation Numbers: 584 F. App'x 290

Judges: Smith, Bowman, Colloton

Filed Date: 11/24/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024