Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03869/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03869-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Perdis Cotton
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Thomas M. Shanahan, United States District Judge for the

District of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3869

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Perdis Cotton, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 12, 2006

Filed: January 19, 2006 

___________

Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Perdis Cotton appeals the 150-month sentence the district court1

 imposed after

granting the government’s Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b) motion to reduce

Cotton’s sentence for his post-sentencing substantial assistance. His counsel has

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

arguing that the reduction should have been even greater. Counsel’s argument is

unavailing. See United States v. Coppedge, 135 F.3d 598, 599 (8th Cir. 1998) (per

curiam) (extent of Rule 35(b) reduction is unreviewable); cf. United States v.

Appellate Case: 04-3869 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/19/2006 Entry ID: 1998759
-2-

Williams, 324 F.3d 1049, 1049-50 (8th Cir. 2003) (per curiam) (refusal to depart

further under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 is not reviewable unless defendant makes “substantial

showing” that court’s decision was based on unconstitutional motive).

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

80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant defense counsel’s

motion to withdraw, and we affirm. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3869 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/19/2006 Entry ID: 1998759