UNITED STATES v. NELSON (2021)

[Unpublished]

Cortez Nelson appeals the within-Guidelines sentence the district court ¹ imposed after he pled guilty to conspiring to distribute a controlled substance. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

Counsel has moved for leave 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 that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. This court concludes that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence because the record reflects that it properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (appellate court first ensures no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard; abuse of discretion occurs when court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing appropriate factors); United States v. St. Claire, 831 F.3d 1039, 1043 (8th Cir. 2016) (within-Guidelines sentence is accorded presumption of substantive reasonableness on appeal). The court has independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.

PER CURIAM.