United States v. Calvin Bernhardt

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-1158

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Calvin Bernhardt

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Bismarck

____________

Submitted: September 3, 2019 Filed: September 6, 2019

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

After this court vacated one conviction and remanded for resentencing, United States v. Bernhardt, 903 F.3d 818 (8th Cir. 2018), the district court1 sentenced Calvin

1 The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota.

Bernhardt to 480 months in prison. Bernhardt appeals, and his counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he seeks permission to withdraw and identifies as a possible issue the district court’s failure to confirm at the resentencing hearing that counsel and Bernhardt had discussed the revised presentence report. In a pro se supplemental brief, Bernhardt argues that the district court’s omission violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(1)(A).

After carefully reviewing the Rule 32 argument for plain error, we find none.

See United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 759 (8th Cir. 2014) (procedural errors not objected to at sentencing are reviewed for plain error; to establish plain error, defendant must show error that is plain and affects substantial rights). In addition, having independently reviewed the resentencing 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 we affirm.

______________________________