United States v. Francisco Pec-Son

693 F. App'x 462
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJuly 14, 2017
Docket16-4390
StatusUnpublished

This text of 693 F. App'x 462 (United States v. Francisco Pec-Son) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Francisco Pec-Son, 693 F. App'x 462 (8th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Francisco Pec-Son appeals following imposition of sentence upon his guilty plea to unlawful use of identification documents and misuse of a social security number. Counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), argues that the district court 1 committed plain procedural error by failing to explain adequately the reasons for the sentence that the court imposed on Pec-Son. After careful review, we conclude that no plain procedural error occurred. See United States v. Chavarria-Ortiz, 828 F.3d 668, 670-71 (8th Cir, 2016) (if defendant fails to object to adequacy of district court’s explanation for sentence, this court reviews for plain error); United States v. Krzyzaniak, 702 F.3d 1082, 1085 (8th Cir. 2013) (explanation is sufficient if record as a whole demonstrates that court considered relevant factors). Further, 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 nonfriv-olous issues.

The judgment is affirmed, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Linda R, Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Michael Krzyzaniak
702 F.3d 1082 (Eighth Circuit, 2013)
United States v. Santos Chavarria-Ortiz
828 F.3d 668 (Eighth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
693 F. App'x 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-francisco-pec-son-ca8-2017.