United States v. Theodore Tiger, Jr.

432 F. App'x 638
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 5, 2011
Docket10-3055, 10-3121
StatusUnpublished

This text of 432 F. App'x 638 (United States v. Theodore Tiger, Jr.) 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. Theodore Tiger, Jr., 432 F. App'x 638 (8th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Theodore Tiger guilty of conspiring to distribute more than 5 grams of cocaine base (crack), in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 846 (Count 1); distributing 5 grams or more of crack, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) (Counts 2-3); and being a felon in possession of firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2) (Count 4). The district court 1 sentenced him to concurrent prison terms of 135 months on Counts 1-3 and 120 months on Count 4, and 8 years of supervised release. Finding that by these offenses Tiger had violated the terms of the supervised release he was already serving, the court also revoked the earlier imposed supervised release and sentenced him to 24 months in prison, to be served consecutively to the 135-month sentence.

In these consolidated appeals, Tiger’s counsel moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Tiger moved to have new counsel appointed. After we reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, granted Tiger’s motion for appointment of new counsel, and directed the parties to brief the issue of whether there was sufficient evidence to support the drug-conspiracy conviction. After careful review of the arguments advanced by both parties, and viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the jury’s verdict and accepting all reasonable inferences that support the verdict, we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support the drug-conspiracy conviction. See United *639 States v. Hernandez, 569 F.3d 893, 896 (8th Cir.2009).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the district court.

1

. The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Hernandez
569 F.3d 893 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
432 F. App'x 638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-theodore-tiger-jr-ca8-2011.