Case ID: f-appx_671/html/0400-01.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. Randall Acton WEST Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-1556
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 26, 2016
    Filed: December 12, 2016
    
      Katie Bagley, Gregory Victor Davis, Samuel Robert Lyons, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC, Kimberly Nicole Davis, Assistant U.S. Attorney, W. L. Johnson, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Arkansas, Fort Smith, AR, Robert A. Ke-mins, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Dallas, TX, David Zisserson, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Randall Acton West, Pro Se
    Before SMITH, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Randall Acton West pled guilty to failure to file individual income tax returns, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. He appeals the restitution order imposed by the district court. Counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S, 738, 87 act 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and moved to withdraw. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

This court reviews for plain error the challenge to the restitution order, as West did not object to the presentence report’s restitution calculations, and finds no error. See United States v. Louper-Morris, 672 F.3d 539, 566 (8th Cir. 2012) (reviewing restitution order for plain error because defendant did not challenge it at sentencing); United States v. Perry, 714 F.3d 570, 577 (8th Cir. 2013) (holding that district court may order defendant to pay restitution to IRS in connection with Title 26 offense; district court’s order to pay “full amount” of tax loss, including interest, was appropriate); United States v. Cullen, 432 F.3d 903, 905 (8th Cir. 2006) (district court may rely on unobjected-to facts in PSR). This court has reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and finds no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. 
      
      . The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.