Case ID: f-appx_628/html/0457-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. DONG PYOU HAN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-2616.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 4, 2016.
    Filed: Jan. 11, 2016.
    Rachel J. Scherle, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Dong Pyou Han, Philipsburg, PA, pro se.
    John P. Messina, Assistant, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before SMITH, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Dong Pyou Han directly appeals the 57-month sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to making false statements. 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), arguing that the sentence was unreasonable. We conclude that the within-Guidelines sentence was not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir.2013) (under substantive review, district court abuses its discretion if it fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing factors); United States v. Cook, 698 F.3d 667, 670 (8th Cir.2012) (treating within-Guidelines sentence as presumptively reasonable on appeal). We have reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 
      
      . The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.