UNITED STATES v. WILLIAMS (2018)

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin Kunlay WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-3356

Decided: August 15, 2018

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Michael Boteler, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section, Washington, DC, Gregory Victor Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC, Charles Martin Edgar, Jr., U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Civil Trial Section, Central Region, Washington, DC, Howard J. Marcus, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Missouri, Saint Louis, MO, Joseph Brian Syverson, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Northern Criminal Enforcement Section, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee Kevin Kunlay Williams, Pro Se

[Unpublished]

Kevin Kunlay Williams directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court ¹ after he pleaded guilty to fraud and immigration offenses. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Williams has moved to proceed pro se.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. The sentence was below the advisory Guideline range. The court properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and there is no indication that the court committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (standard of review); see also United States v. Torres-Ojeda, 829 F.3d 1027, 1030 (8th Cir. 2016).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion, deny Williams’s pro se motion, and affirm.

FOOTNOTES

1. The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network