United States v. Thein Maung

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-3289

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Thein Maung, also known as Joseph Ramarn

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

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

____________

Submitted: May 17, 2024

Filed: May 22, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Thein Maung appeals after he pleaded guilty to multiple counts relating to a scheme to defraud the government and other individuals. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court1 did not err in imposing the below-Guidelines sentence that Maung received, as the record reflects that the court properly calculated the Guidelines range and considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and there is no indication the court overlooked a relevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. Meza-Lopez, 808 F.3d 743, 745-46 (8th Cir. 2015); United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc); United States v. Moore, 581 F.3d 681, 684 (8th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).

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

______________________________

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.