United States v. Micah E. Tyson

104 F. App'x 606
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedAugust 12, 2004
Docket03-4038
StatusUnpublished

This text of 104 F. App'x 606 (United States v. Micah E. Tyson) 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. Micah E. Tyson, 104 F. App'x 606 (8th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 03-4038 ___________

United States of America, * * Plaintiff-Appellee, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Western Micah E. Tyson, * District of Missouri. * Defendant-Appellant. * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________

Submitted: July 22, 2004 Filed: August 12, 2004 ___________

Before MELLOY, LAY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

This matter comes before the court for review on the ground that the district court, in revoking Defendant’s probation, imposed a sentence above that recommended by the Guidelines. See United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, § 7B1.4(a) (Nov. 2002). Defendant’s counsel has sought permission to withdraw and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging the ground upon which the Defendant appeals. The district court articulated the reasons for imposing a sentence above the recommended Guidelines range, and we find no abuse of discretion in this regard. See United States v. Brown, 203 F.3d 557, 558-59 (8th Cir. 2000). This court has also reviewed the record of the district court in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and finds no nonfrivolous issues. The district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

We also grant defense counsel’s motion to withdraw. Counsel is reminded of the obligations under Part V of this Court’s Amended Criminal Justice Act Plan. Specifically, counsel is to advise the defendant of the right to file a petition for writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States, and to inform the defendant as to the merits and likelihood of success in the filing of such a petition. If counsel determines there are meritorious issues, defense counsel shall assist the defendant in filing a petition for writ of certiorari. If counsel determines there are no meritorious issues warranting the filing of a petition for writ of certiorari, counsel shall advise the defendant of the procedures for filing a petition pro se, and the time limits for the filing of such a petition. Counsel shall file a certification with the clerk within 30 days certifying that he has complied with his obligations under Part V. ______________________________

-2-

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. Steve J. Brown
203 F.3d 557 (Eighth Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
104 F. App'x 606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-micah-e-tyson-ca8-2004.