Filed: Feb. 16, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-2330 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Ryan Douglas Horn lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids _ Submitted: February 10, 2016 Filed: February 16, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Ryan Horn directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense an
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-2330 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Ryan Douglas Horn lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids _ Submitted: February 10, 2016 Filed: February 16, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Ryan Horn directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense and..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-2330
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Ryan Douglas Horn
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
____________
Submitted: February 10, 2016
Filed: February 16, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Ryan Horn directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense and a firearm
offense and the district court1 imposed a within-Guidelines-range sentence. His
1
The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Northern District of Iowa.
counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing
that Horn’s sentence is substantively unreasonable.
After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a
substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. David,
682 F.3d 1074,
1076-77 (8th Cir. 2012) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions).
Furthermore, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.
The judgment is affirmed.
______________________________
-2-