United States v. Oscar Mims

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Oscar Mims

684 F. App'x 593

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 2017

Docket16-2975

StatusUnpublished

This text of 684 F. App'x 593 (United States v. Oscar Mims) 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. Oscar Mims, 684 F. App'x 593 (8th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Oscar Lamar Mims guilty of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846. The district court, 1 sentenced Mims to 120 months in prison. Mims’s counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the sufficiency of the evidence, the reasonableness of the sentence, and the effectiveness of counsel. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

The challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence fails in part because the. jury heard numerous recorded telephone conversations related to a network of individuals involved in the distribution of heroin, and some of the calls established Mims’s knowing participation in purchasing heroin for redistribution. See United States v. Ramirez, 362 F.3d 521, 524 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review); United States v. Peeler, 779 F.3d 773, 776 (8th Cir. 2015) (evidence of multiple sales of drugs sufficient to establish conspiracy where defendant was a party to one or more wiretapped conversations discussing aspects of heroin business, and indicating speaker’s knowledge and involvement in common drug-distribution scheme). Mims received the statutory minimum sentence, and there is no indication in the record that the sentence is unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-64 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Ineffective-assistance claims are usually best left for proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, where the record can be developed as needed. See United States v. Davis, 583 F.3d 1081, 1091 (8th Cir. 2009). An independent review of the record reveals no nonfrivolous issue for review. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988).

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

1

. The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

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

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Oscar Lamar Mims guilty of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846. The district court, 1 sentenced Mims to 120 months in prison. Mims’s counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the sufficiency of the evidence, the reasonableness of the sentence, and the effectiveness of counsel. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

The challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence fails in part because the. jury heard numerous recorded telephone conversations related to a network of individuals involved in the distribution of heroin, and some of the calls established Mims’s knowing participation in purchasing heroin for redistribution. See United States v. Ramirez, 362 F.3d 521, 524 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review); United States v. Peeler, 779 F.3d 773, 776 (8th Cir. 2015) (evidence of multiple sales of drugs sufficient to establish conspiracy where defendant was a party to one or more wiretapped conversations discussing aspects of heroin business, and indicating speaker’s knowledge and involvement in common drug-distribution scheme). Mims received the statutory minimum sentence, and there is no indication in the record that the sentence is unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-64 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Ineffective-assistance claims are usually best left for proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, where the record can be developed as needed. See United States v. Davis, 583 F.3d 1081, 1091 (8th Cir. 2009). An independent review of the record reveals no nonfrivolous issue for review. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988).

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

1

. The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

684 F. App'x 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-oscar-mims-ca8-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack