United States v. Appling

580 F. App'x 506
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 20, 2014
Docket14-1456
StatusPublished

This text of 580 F. App'x 506 (United States v. Appling) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Appling, 580 F. App'x 506 (8th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Dwayne Appling directly appeals the sentences imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to drug offenses. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the sentences are unreasonable.

After careful review, we conclude that Appling’s within-Guidelines-range sentences are not unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc) (appellate review of sentencing decision). Also, having independently reviewed the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Feemster
572 F.3d 455 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
580 F. App'x 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-appling-ca8-2014.