United States v. Kenee Triplett

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: June 28, 2022
• Docket: 21-2727
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 21-2727 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Kenee L. Triplett

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

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

Submitted: June 21, 2022 Filed: June 28, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Kenee Triplett appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed

1 The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the criminal history calculation and the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not err in calculating Triplett’s criminal history. See United States v. Townsend, 408 F.3d 1020, 1022 (8th Cir. 2005). We also conclude that the sentence is not substantively unreasonable, as the court properly considered relevant factors and did not clearly err in weighing the appropriate factors. See United States v. Peithman, 917 F.3d 635, 653 (8th Cir. 2019); United States v. Garcia, 946 F.3d 413, 419 (8th Cir. 2019); United States v. Farmer, 647 F.3d 1175, 1179 (8th Cir. 2011).

We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we deny Triplett’s motion for appellate counsel as moot. ______________________________

-2-