United States v. Columbus Lawrence

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 20-2128 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Columbus Tre Lawrence, also known as Tre, also known as Country Lawrence

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________

Submitted: February 26, 2021 Filed: March 4, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________

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

PER CURIAM.

Columbus Lawrence appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to a firearm offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed

1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the district court’s application of United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B)’s four-level enhancement to Lawrence’s advisory offense level for possession of a firearm in connection with another felony offense (Iowa Code § 724.4(1)).

Lawrence argues the district court erred in imposing the enhancement because the conduct leading to his conviction was the same conduct by which he could be held accountable under section 724.4(1). As Lawrence acknowledges, this argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Walker, 771 F.3d 449, 452-53 (8th Cir. 2014); see also United States v. Manning, 786 F.3d 684, 686 (8th Cir. 2015) (“A panel of this Court is bound by a prior Eighth Circuit decision unless that case is overruled by the Court sitting en banc.”).

Further, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion and affirm. ______________________________

-2-