Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03229/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03229-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Terry L. Sanders
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable William Jay Riley became Chief Judge of the United States

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on April 1, 2010. 

2

The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3229

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Arkansas.

*

Terry L. Sanders, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: March 23, 2010

Filed: April 6, 2010

___________

Before RILEY,1

 Chief Judge, BYE and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Terry Sanders directly appeals after he was convicted and sentenced in the

district court2

 upon his guilty plea to intentionally conveying false and misleading

information that he was involved with and had knowledge of an international terrorist

plot to poison the food supply in the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 1038(a)(1). His counsel has moved for permission to withdraw, and has filed a brief

Appellate Case: 09-3229 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/06/2010 Entry ID: 3651782
-2-

under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning the district court’s

finding that Sanders was competent to enter his guilty plea and suggesting that the

court should have ordered a competency hearing because Sanders had a history of

mental illness. In a pro se supplemental brief, Sanders argues that his counsel was

ineffective. Sanders has also filed a motion requesting that his attorney be ordered to

provide him with certain documents.

We conclude that the district court committed no error in finding Sanders

competent to enter his guilty plea. At the change-of-plea hearing, Sanders was

responsive and engaged when the court addressed him, and he indicated that he was

not under the influence of drugs or medication. At his sentencing hearing, Sanders

confirmed that he was satisfied with his counsel and saw no reason to withdraw his

guilty plea. See United States v. Rollins, 552 F.3d 739, 741-42 (8th Cir. 2009) (even

if suffering from disease, defendant’s plea is valid if record demonstrates he

understood charge against him, was not dissatisfied with services rendered by his

attorney, and entered his plea knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Andis, 333

F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (one important way district court can

ensure plea agreement is knowing and voluntary is to question defendant properly

about decision to enter agreement); see also United States v. Murphy, 572F.3d 563,

569 (8th Cir. 2009) (district court’s finding of defendant’s competence reviewed for

clear error); United States v. Day, 949 F.2d 973, 982 (8th Cir. 1991) (absent some

contrary indication, trial judges are entitled to presume that defendants are competent).

We also conclude that the district court committed no procedural or substantive error

in sentencing Sanders. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.

2009) (en banc) (standards for reviewing sentence).

As to Sanders’s ineffective-assistance claim, we decline to consider this matter

on direct appeal. See United States v. McAdory, 501 F.3d 868, 872-73 (8th Cir. 2007)

(appellate court ordinarily defers ineffective-assistance claims to 28 U.S.C. § 2255

proceedings).

Appellate Case: 09-3229 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/06/2010 Entry ID: 3651782
-3-

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw, we deny Sanders’s motion, and we affirm the judgment

of the district court.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-3229 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/06/2010 Entry ID: 3651782