DocketNumber： 21-1984
Filed Date： 3/1/2022
Status： Non-Precedential
Modified Date： 3/1/2022
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1984 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Christopher Michael Goerdt lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________ Submitted: February 14, 2022 Filed: March 1, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Christopher Goerdt appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to bank fraud, wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and misapplication by 1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, then District Judge, now Chief Judge, United States District Court the Southern District of Iowa. a bank officer. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California,386 U.S. 738
(1967), challenging several findings underlying the district court’s United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”) calculations. Upon careful review, we conclude the district court did not commit any procedural error in sentencing Goerdt. See United States v. Feemster,572 F.3d 455
, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (in reviewing sentence, appellate court first ensures district court committed no significant procedural error, such as improperly calculating Guidelines range); see also United States v. Jenkins-Watts,574 F.3d 950
, 960–61 (8th Cir. 2009) (discussing appellate review of loss determinations). Further, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio,488 U.S. 75
(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and affirm. ______________________________ -2-