United States v. Perdis Cotton

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Perdis Cotton

84 F. App'x 724

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 6, 2004

Docket03-2175

StatusUnpublished

This text of 84 F. App'x 724 (United States v. Perdis Cotton) 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. Perdis Cotton, 84 F. App'x 724 (8th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Perdis Cotton challenges the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute, and to possess with intent to distribute, 50 grams or more of a substance containing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846. The district court granted Cotton a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(b), comment, (n.7), and sentenced him to 299 months imprisonment and 5 years supervised release. On appeal, Cotton’s counsel has moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the court erred in not granting a further downward departure based on Cotton’s overstated criminal history.

The district court’s decision not to grant the downward departure was discretionary; thus, the decision is unreviewable. See United States v. VanHouten, 307 F.3d 693, 696 (8th Cir.2002) (discretionary decision not to depart from Guidelines is unreviewable on appeal absent unconstitutional motive, unless district court erroneously concluded it lacked authority to depart).

Following careful review of the record, we find no other nonfrivolous issues. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Thomas M. Shanahan, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

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

PER CURIAM.

Perdis Cotton challenges the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute, and to possess with intent to distribute, 50 grams or more of a substance containing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846. The district court granted Cotton a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(b), comment, (n.7), and sentenced him to 299 months imprisonment and 5 years supervised release. On appeal, Cotton’s counsel has moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the court erred in not granting a further downward departure based on Cotton’s overstated criminal history.

The district court’s decision not to grant the downward departure was discretionary; thus, the decision is unreviewable. See United States v. VanHouten, 307 F.3d 693, 696 (8th Cir.2002) (discretionary decision not to depart from Guidelines is unreviewable on appeal absent unconstitutional motive, unless district court erroneously concluded it lacked authority to depart).

Following careful review of the record, we find no other nonfrivolous issues. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Thomas M. Shanahan, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 F. App'x 724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-perdis-cotton-ca8-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack