UNITED STATES v. EDEN (2019)

[Unpublished]

Michael Eden directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to a child-pornography charge and the district court ¹ sentenced him below the calculated Guidelines range. 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), suggesting that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. We have carefully reviewed the district court’s sentencing decision and find no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461–62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Moreover, we have independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

PER CURIAM.