United States v. Tevonta Tiller

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 20-2257

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Tevonta Reair Tiller

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Western

____________

Submitted: January 11, 2021 Filed: January 22, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Tevonta Tiller appeals after he pleaded guilty to bank robbery and a firearm offense, and the district court1 sentenced him below the Guidelines range. His counsel

1 The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Tiller’s conviction and sentence should be vacated due to vindictive prosecution.

Upon careful review, we conclude that Tiller did not demonstrate that the government vindictively prosecuted him. See United States v. Williams, 793 F.3d 957, 963-64 (8th Cir. 2015) (defendant bears heavy burden to demonstrate vindictive prosecution); United States v. Chappell, 779 F.3d 872, 880 (8th Cir. 2015) (presumption of regularity supports prosecutorial decisions absent clear, contrary evidence).

We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motions to withdraw.

______________________________