Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0890-01.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. Ian MACKIE Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-4535
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: September 13, 2017
    Filed: October 3, 2017
    Colleen Lang, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Missouri, Saint Louis, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Ian Mackie, Pro Se
    Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Ian Mackie directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he pled guilty to enticement of a minor and receipt of child pornography. Mackie’s 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), challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review, we conclude that Mackie’s sentence, which was imposed within his Sentencing Guidelines range, is not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions; if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court may, but is not required to, apply presumption of reasonableness).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 
      
      , The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.