Case ID: f-appx_403/html/0126-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jason Dale GORDON, Appellant.
    No. 10-2324.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 30, 2010.
    Filed: Dec. 9, 2010.
    Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

James Dale Gordon appeals the substantially below-Guidelines-range sentence the district court imposed following his guilty plea to one count of knowingly distributing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1). In a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel argues only that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court gave insufficient weight to mitigating factors in declining to grant a larger downward variance. Having carefully reviewed the sentencing record, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion by imposing an unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc) (standard of review); United States v. Stults, 575 F.3d 834, 849 (8th Cir.2009) (upholding below-Guidelines-range sentence), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1309, 175 L.Ed.2d 1093 (2010).

We have also reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. We grant defense counsel’s motion to withdraw, subject to counsel informing Gordon about the procedures for seeking rehearing from this court and for petitioning the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. 
      
      . The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.