Filed: Jan. 06, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-2269 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Shawn A. Williams lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau _ Submitted: December 28, 2016 Filed: January 6, 2017 _ Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Shawn Williams directly appeals after he pled guilty to being a felon in po
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-2269 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Shawn A. Williams lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau _ Submitted: December 28, 2016 Filed: January 6, 2017 _ Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Shawn Williams directly appeals after he pled guilty to being a felon in pos..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-2269
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Shawn A. Williams
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
____________
Submitted: December 28, 2016
Filed: January 6, 2017
____________
Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Shawn Williams directly appeals after he pled guilty to being a felon in
possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and the district court1
sentenced him to 51 months in prison, which was the low end of the calculated
1
The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri.
Guidelines range. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning the reasonableness of
Williams’s sentence.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a
substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster,
572 F.3d 455,
461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (sentences reviewed under deferential abuse-of-
discretion standard; discussing substantive reasonableness); see also Gall v. United
States,
552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007) (if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court
may apply presumption of reasonableness). In addition, having independently
reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no
nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw,
and we affirm.
______________________________
-2-