Case ID: f-appx_182/html/0616-01.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, Appellee, v. James Quenzell OWENS, Appellant.
    No. 05-3132.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 23, 2006.
    Decided: May 30, 2006.
    
      Benjamin J. Stansberry, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Appellee.
    Rodney J. Ryan, Rodney J. Ryan P.C., Des Moines, IA, for Appellant.
    Before RILEY, MAGILL, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

A jury found James Quenzell Owens guilty of possessing 500 grams or more of powder cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced him to 120 months in prison and 8 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), raising two issues.

First, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Owens consented to the search of his car during a traffic stop, see United States v. Esquivias, 416 F.3d 696, 699-700 (8th Cir.2005) (standard of review), or in finding that Owens’s consent was voluntary, see United States v. Mancias, 350 F.3d 800, 804 (8th Cir.2003) (standard of review). Second, we conclude that the trial evidence was sufficient to support his conviction. See United States v. Howard, 427 F.3d 554, 557 (8th Cir.2005) (standard of review; elements of offense).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 
      
      . The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.