DocketNumber: 99-1776
Filed Date: 10/29/1999
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 10/13/2015
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 99-1776 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Carl James McPipe, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * ___________ Submitted: October 25, 1999 Filed: October 29, 1999 ___________ Before LOKEN, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Carl James McPipe challenges the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the distribution of .2 grams of cocaine base within 1,000 feet of a school, in violation of21 U.S.C. §§ 841
(a)(1) and 860, and18 U.S.C. § 2
. McPipe’s counsel has filed a brief, in which he argues that the court erred in denying a two-level minor-role reduction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2 (1997), and McPipe’s counsel has moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. 1 The HONORABLE JOHN R. TUNHEIM, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. California,386 U.S. 738
(1967). Although we granted McPipe permission to file a pro se supplemental brief, he has not done so. We conclude that the district court’s denial of the minor-role reduction is unreviewable because the court granted the government’s downward-departure motion and sentenced McPipe to a term of imprisonment below the range that would have resulted if he had received the minor-role reduction. See United States v. Coleman,132 F.3d 440
, 441 (8th Cir.) (per curiam) (denial of mitigating-role reduction unreviewable where defendant receives sentence below applicable Guidelines range with or without requested reduction), cert. denied,118 S. Ct. 1821
and119 S. Ct. 116
(1998). After review of counsel’s Anders brief, along with our independent review of the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio,488 U.S. 75
(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-