Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-01641/USCOURTS-ca8-09-01641-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Calshaun Hicks
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the

District of Nebraska. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-1641

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Calshaun Hicks, also known as Joker, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: March 29, 2010

Filed: April 1, 2010 

___________

Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Calshaun Hicks challenges the sentence imposed on him by the district court1

after he pleaded guilty to a cocaine-base conspiracy offense. On appeal, Hicks’s

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

moved to withdraw, arguing that the district court improperly sentenced Hicks as a

career offender, because the two convictions underlying career offender status were

not “crimes of violence.” See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 (career offender Guideline).

Appellate Case: 09-1641 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/01/2010 Entry ID: 3650536
-2-

We review de novo the district court’s determination that a prior conviction

constitutes a “crime of violence” for purposes of career offender status. See United

States v. Davis, 583 F.3d 1081, 1092-93 (8th Cir. 2009). We conclude that Hicks’s

Nebraska conviction for attempted robbery qualifies as a crime of violence. See

U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(1) (defining “crimes of violence” as crimes that have “as an

element, the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person

of another”); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-324(1) (1989) (“person commits robbery if, with

the intent to steal, he forcibly and by violence, or by putting in fear, takes from the

person of another any money or personal property of any value whatever”); United

States v. Sawyer, 588 F.3d 548, 555-56 (8th Cir. 2009) (attempted robbery was crime

of violence); see also U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, comment. (n.1). Hicks’s federal conviction

for aiding and abetting a carjacking is also a crime of violence. See 18 U.S.C. § 2119

(person commits carjacking if he takes motor vehicle “from the person or presence of

another by force and violence or by intimidation”); United States v. Brown, 550 F.3d

724, 728 (8th Cir. 2008) (under Guidelines, “crime of violence” includes offense of

aiding and abetting). 

We reject counsel’s additional argument that Hicks’s sentence, which falls at

the bottom of the Guidelines range, is unreasonable. See Rita v. United States, 551

U.S. 338, 347-50 (2007) (approving appellate presumption of reasonableness for

sentences within properly calculated Guidelines range); United States v. Feemster,

572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (standard of review). Finally, having

reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), for any nonfrivolous

issues, we find none. 

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

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-1641 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/01/2010 Entry ID: 3650536