United States v. Channing Williams

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: July 19, 2024
• Docket: 23-3494
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 23-3494 ___________________________

United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Channing Tyler Williams

Defendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City ____________

Submitted: July 15, 2024 Filed: July 19, 2024 [Unpublished] ____________

Before KELLY, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

After pleading guilty to a firearms charge, Channing Williams received a 120- month prison sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). An Anders brief suggests the sentence is procedurally and substantively flawed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We conclude otherwise. The district court 1 correctly determined that Williams’s prior conviction for exhibiting a lethal weapon, see Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030.1(4), was a crime of violence. See United States v. Larry, 51 F.4th 290, 291–92 (8th Cir. 2022); see also U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(1). It then calculated the advisory range, selected a sentence, and explained its reasoning. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing the reasonableness of a sentence for an abuse of discretion). In doing so, the court sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and did not rely on an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment. See United States v. McDaniels, 19 F.4th 1065, 1067 (8th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (explaining that the district court has “wide latitude to weigh the relevant sentencing factors” and “weighing [them] differently than a defendant would have preferred does not alone justify reversal” (citation omitted)).

We have also independently reviewed the record and conclude that no other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83 (1988). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-