Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03021/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03021-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Martin Larry Wilson
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3021

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

Martin Larry Wilson, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: March 10, 2010

Filed: March 15, 2010

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal after a remand, Martin Wilson, who pled guilty

to being a felon in possession of a firearm, challenges the sentence the district court1

imposed upon resentencing. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief

under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the district court’s

decision to depart upward by raising Wilson’s criminal history category under the

Sentencing Guidelines from III to IV. Specifically, counsel argues that the court

abused its discretion because it relied on unscored convictions that were largely

Appellate Case: 09-3021 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/15/2010 Entry ID: 3644206
-2-

misdemeanors and reflected Wilson’s alcoholism rather than incorrigibility. Wilson

argues in a pro se supplemental brief that, because he possessed the firearm as a

keepsake, he should have been assigned a lower base offense level under the

Guidelines.

We hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in departing upward

to a Category IV criminal history, because the court explained that it was basing the

upward departure on the seriousness of Wilson’s unscored convictions, his repeated

assaults on his wife, and the likelihood of violent recidivism. See U.S.S.G.

§ 4A1.3(a)(1); United States v. Vasquez, 552 F.3d 734, 738-39 (8th Cir. 2009)

(standard of review; upward departures under § 4A1.3(a) are applicable if reliable

information indicates that criminal history category substantially under-represents

seriousness of criminal history or likelihood that defendant will recidivate; court may

take into account any evidence of obvious incorrigibility and conclude that leniency

has not been effective). We further hold that Wilson’s pro se argument is foreclosed

by his plea agreement, because Wilson stipulated in the plea agreement that he did not

possess the firearm for lawful sporting purposes or for collection. See United States

v. Paton, 535 F.3d 829, 834-35 (8th Cir. 2008) (de novo standard of review; defendant

foreclosed from making arguments precluded by terms of plea agreement).

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

80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

judgment and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-3021 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/15/2010 Entry ID: 3644206