United States v. Erik Barber

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided February 8, 2021·No. 20-2467·Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

No. 20-2467

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Erik M. Barber

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Western

Submitted: February 3, 2021 Filed: February 8, 2021

[Unpublished]

Before GRASZ, WOLLMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Erik Barber received a 219-month sentence after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute a controlled substance. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), 846. In an Anders brief, Barber’s counsel suggests that the sentence is substantively unreasonable and requests permission to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We affirm.

We conclude that Barber’s sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461–62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (applying an abuse-of-discretion standard); see also United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (stating that a within-Guidelines-range sentence is presumptively reasonable). The record establishes that the district court 1 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. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923–24 (8th Cir. 2006). Moreover, the court had no obligation to vary downward “on policy grounds,” even if it had the authority to do so. United States v. Black, 670 F.3d 877, 882 (8th Cir. 2012).

Finally, we have 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 James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

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

United States v. Erik Barber, (8th Cir. 2021).

United States v. Erik Barber (United States v. Erik Barber) — 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. Black
670 F.3d 877 (Eighth Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Duane Larison
432 F.3d 921 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Feemster
572 F.3d 455 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Callaway
762 F.3d 754 (Eighth Circuit, 2014)