United States v. Tracy Presson

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-1733

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Tracy Todd Presson

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield

____________

Submitted: September 1, 2021 Filed: September 7, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

The district court 1 imposed an 840-month prison sentence after Tracy Presson pleaded guilty to sexually exploiting and coercing and enticing a minor. See 18

1 The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) (sexual exploitation), 2422(b) (coercion and enticement). In an Anders brief, Presson’s counsel suggests that the district court should have permitted Presson to withdraw his guilty plea. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). In a pro se brief, Presson argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct.

We conclude that the plea was knowing and voluntary, see Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997) (explaining that a defendant’s statements during the plea hearing carry “a strong presumption of verity”), plea counsel was not ineffective, see id.; United States v. Trevino, 829 F.3d 668, 672 (8th Cir. 2016), and that there is no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, see United States v. Hunter, 770 F.3d 740, 743 (8th Cir. 2014). We have also independently reviewed the record and conclude that no other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83 (1988). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw.

______________________________