Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-10-01632/USCOURTS-ca8-10-01632-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jack Kloster
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The HONORABLE JIMM LARRY HENDREN, Chief Judge, United States

District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 10-1632

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Western District of Arkansas.

*

Jack Kloster, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: July 14, 2010

 Filed: August 2, 2010

___________

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jack Kloster pleaded guilty to receiving child pornography, and the district

court1

 sentenced him to 151 months in prison and supervised release for life. Counsel

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

(1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district

court disproportionately weighed a victim statement that was read into the record at

the sentencing hearing. We reject this argument, affirm Kloster’s sentence, and grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw.

Appellate Case: 10-1632 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/02/2010 Entry ID: 3689051
-2-

To begin, we note that the sentence was imposed at the bottom of the

uncontested Guidelines range, and therefore on appeal, the sentence is entitled to a

presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Sicaros-Quintero, 557 F.3d 579,

583 (8th Cir. 2009). And having carefully reviewed the record, including the court’s

remarks during the sentencing hearing, we conclude that Kloster has not rebutted the

presumption of reasonableness, based on the court’s consideration of the victim

statement or any other reason. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th

Cir. 2009) (en banc) (listing factors that constitute abuse of discretion).

We also have reviewed the record, as required by Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), to determine whether there are any nonfrivolous issues for appeal, and we

have found none. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw

conditioned on counsel informing Kloster about the procedures for seeking rehearing

from this court and filing a petition for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court of

the United States.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 10-1632 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/02/2010 Entry ID: 3689051