Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-19-02944/USCOURTS-ca8-19-02944-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerome Nash
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-2944

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Jerome Nash,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

 ____________

 Submitted: May 5, 2020

Filed: May 8, 2020

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, BEAM, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Jerome Nash appeals after he pleaded guilty to unlawfully possessing a firearm

as a felon. The district court1

 sentenced him under the Armed Career Criminal Act

1The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri.

Appellate Case: 19-2944 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/08/2020 Entry ID: 4911058
(ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), to 180 months in prison. His counsel has moved to

withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

challenging the determination that Nash’s prior second-degree robbery convictions

qualified as ACCA predicate offenses.

After careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court did not err in

concluding that Nash’s prior Missouri second-degree robbery convictions qualified

as ACCA predicate offenses. This court previously has determined that a conviction

under Missouri’s second-degree robbery statute categorically qualifies as an ACCA

predicate offense. See United States v. Swopes, 886 F.3d 668, 671 (8th Cir. 2018) (en

banc), cert. denied, 139 S. Ct. 1258 (2019); see also United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d

702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal

waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm the

judgment of the district court.

______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 19-2944 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/08/2020 Entry ID: 4911058