United States v. Richard Robinson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: September 9, 2021
• Docket: 21-1629
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 21-1629 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Richard Darnell Robinson

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central ____________

Submitted: September 3, 2021 Filed: September 9, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________

Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Richard Robinson appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he plead guilty to a firearm offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed

1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Robinson, as there was no indication that it overlooked a relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors, see United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review); and the sentence was within the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual range, see United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (“A sentence which falls within the guideline range is presumed to be reasonable[.]”). Furthermore, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________

-2-