United States v. Appling

580 F. App'x 506
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided October 20, 2014·No. 14-1456·Published

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.

Footnotes

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

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

580 F. App'x 506 (United States v. Appling) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)