Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03802/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03802-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dobie Lee Brown
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

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. 09-3802

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Dobie Lee Brown, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: March 10, 2010

 Filed: March 15, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After Dobie Brown pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the possession with

intent to distribute of 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing cocaine

base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, the district court1

sentenced him to 151 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal,

Brown’s counsel has moved to withdraw, filing a brief under Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Brown has filed a pro se supplemental brief. Having

carefully reviewed the record and the submissions on appeal, we affirm.

Appellate Case: 09-3802 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/15/2010 Entry ID: 3644161
-2-

We address seriatim the arguments raised in the Anders and pro se briefs: (1)

any issue as to Brown’s competency to plead guilty is not properly raised for the first

time in this direct criminal appeal, see United States v. Murphy, 899 F.2d 714, 716

(8th Cir. 1990); (2) Brown was represented by counsel throughout these proceedings,

and any issue regarding ineffective assistance is not properly before us, see United

States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006); (3) Brown

exercised his right of allocution; and (4) his sentence, which falls within the advisory

Guidelines range, is not unreasonable, see United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455,

461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc).

Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find

no nonfrivolous issues for review. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and we

grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-3802 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/15/2010 Entry ID: 3644161