Case ID: f-appx_690/html/0445-01.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. Shawn LEE Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-3134
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 24, 2017
    Filed: June 5, 2017
    Hunter Bridges, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Shawn Lee, Pro Se
    Before SHEPHERD, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Shawn Lee directly appeals the sentence the district court imposed after he pled guilty to possessing a prohibited object in prison, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1791(a)(2) and (d)(1)(B). 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 Lee’s sentence is unreasonable.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (discussing appellate review of sentences; if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court may apply, but is not required to apply, presumption of reasonableness). Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm. 
      
      . The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.