United States v. Marquis Huntley
This text of United States v. Marquis Huntley (United States v. Marquis Huntley) 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.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 22-3673 ___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Marquis Huntley
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________
Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________
Submitted: May 9, 2023 Filed: May 12, 2023 [Unpublished] ____________
Before GRUENDER, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
Marquis Huntley appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to drug offenses. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has
1 The Honorable John A. Ross, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of Huntley’s prison sentence.
Having reviewed the record under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard of review, see Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41, 51 (2007), we conclude Huntley’s prison sentence was not substantively unreasonable. The district court considered the statutory sentencing factors and did not overlook a relevant factor, give significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or commit a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). The district court, moreover, acted within its discretion by varying upward on this record. See Feemster, 572 F.3d at 461-62; see also United States v. Kelley, 652 F.3d 915, 918 (8th Cir. 2011). Finally, we have 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 and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Marquis Huntley, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-marquis-huntley-ca8-2023.