Case ID: f-appx_709/html/0406-01.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 Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher PECK Defendant-Appellant
    No. 17-2147
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: December 28, 2017
    Filed: January 9, 2018
    James J. Kelleher, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Springfield, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Christopher Peck, Pro Se
    Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Christopher Peck challenges the sentence the district court imposed following his guilty plea to child pornography charges. His counsel has moved to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct, 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), discussing the reasonableness of the sentence.

We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion, as it properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors; there was no indication that it overlooked a relevant factor, or committed -a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors, see United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074, 1077 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review); United States v. Wohlman, 651 F.3d 878, 887 (8th Cir. 2011); and the sentence was within the Guidelines range, see United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014). Furthermore, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, wé grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm. 
      
      . The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.