United States v. Valentino McCampbell

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: April 26, 2022
• Docket: 21-3375
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 21-3375 ___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Valentino Giovanni McCampbell,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant. ____________

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

Submitted: April 20, 2022 Filed: April 26, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________

Before COLLOTON, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Valentino McCampbell appeals a sentence imposed by the district court1 after McCampbell pleaded guilty to a firearm offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the court erred in applying enhancements for an offense involving a stolen firearm, and for possessing a firearm in connection with another felony offense.

We conclude that the district court did not err in applying the enhancements, as the record supported the court’s findings that a firearm had been stolen, see U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4), comment. (n.8(B)); United States v. Bates, 584 F.3d 1105, 1108-10 (8th Cir. 2009), and that McCampbell used the firearms to facilitate his drug activities, see U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6), comment. (n.14(B)); United States v. Dixon, 822 F.3d 464, 465 (8th Cir. 2016).

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 motion to withdraw. ______________________________

-2-