United States v. Txong Thor

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 25-3314

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Txong Thor

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________

Submitted: April 27, 2026 Filed: April 30, 2026

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Txong Thor appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pled guilty to a drug offense and possession of a firearm in furtherance of such offense.

1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.

His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Thor. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (standard of review); United States v. McCauley, 715 F.3d 1119, 1127 (8th Cir. 2013) (stating it is “nearly inconceivable” that the district court abused its discretion in not varying further when it varied below the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual range). In addition, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________