United States v. Brown

676 F. App'x 619
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided February 16, 2017·No. No. 16-3348·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kunta Brown directly appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm charges. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. [620] California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning the reasonableness of Brown’s sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (explaining that sentences are reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard and discussing substantive reasonableness). In addition, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. 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. Brown, 676 F. App'x 619 (8th Cir. 2017).

676 F. App'x 619 (United States v. Brown) — 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)