Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01537/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01537-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dwayne Parker
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1537

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri.

Dwayne Parker, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: November 28, 2005

Filed: November 30, 2005

___________

Before ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Dwayne Parker guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm,

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), and possessing an unregistered firearm, in violation

of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). At sentencing, the district court1 granted the downward

departure Mr. Parker requested and sentenced him to two concurrent terms of fiftyseven months in prison and two years of supervised release. This represented the

middle of the advisory Guidelines imprisonment range.

Appellate Case: 05-1537 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/30/2005 Entry ID: 1980352
-2-

On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is unreasonable under the

standard of review established in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). We

conclude that the sentence is not unreasonable. Mr. Parker’s prior convictions include

first-degree assault and possessing cocaine. The instant offenses of conviction

involved possessing a loaded sawed-off shotgun in an apartment where children were

present. The district court showed Mr. Parker leniency by granting his requested

downward departure. The court’s written sentencing memorandum expressly refers

to its consideration of the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States

v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir. 2005) (sentence within Guidelines range

is presumptively reasonable, and defendant must rebut presumption of

reasonableness), petition for cert. filed, __ U.S.L.W. __ (U.S. Nov. 7, 2005) (No.

05-7506).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio,

488 U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1537 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/30/2005 Entry ID: 1980352