Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01478/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01478-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Darrell Givens
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1478

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Darrell Givens, * Western District of Missouri.

*

Appellant. * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________

Submitted: February 2, 2006 

Filed: February 8, 2006 

___________

Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Darrell Givens pleaded guilty to distributing 5 grams or more of crack cocaine,

in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), on four occasions in March and

April 2004. After the sentencing hearing--which was conducted post-United States

v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), under advisory Guidelines--the district court1

sentenced Mr. Givens to concurrent terms of 121 months imprisonment and 8 years

of supervised release. Mr. Givens appeals, and his counsel has filed a brief under

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Mr. Givens has filed a pro se

Appellate Case: 05-1478 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/08/2006 Entry ID: 2007390
-2-

supplemental brief and an appellate motion, which we construe as a motion to strike

the Anders brief and appoint new counsel.

As to the arguments in the Anders brief, Mr. Givens’s prior Missouri felony

drug conviction, for which he received a suspended imposition of sentence and

probation, qualified as a prior final felony drug conviction for purposes of triggering

the 10-year minimum prison term under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b), see United States v.

Slicer, 361 F.3d 1085, 1087-88 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 914 (2004); United

States v. Ortega, 150 F.3d 937, 948 (8th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1087

(1999), and any contention that the Missouri conviction was not a “controlled

substance offense” within the meaning of the Guidelines provision related to career

offender status is irrelevant. In addition, Mr. Givens waived his sentencemanipulation or sentence-entrapment argument by pleading guilty and stipulating to

his accountability for 122.01 grams of crack cocaine for purposes of his Guidelines

base offense level. See United States v. Nguyen, 46 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1995)

(defendant who explicitly and voluntarily exposes himself to specific sentence may

not challenge that punishment on appeal).

Mr. Givens’s pro se arguments concerning his counsel’s performance and any

resulting miscarriage of justice should be brought, if at all, in 28 U.S.C. § 2255

proceedings, where the record can be properly developed. See United States v.

Hughes, 330 F.3d 1068, 1069 (8th Cir. 2003).

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment

of the district court, and we deny the pending motion.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1478 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/08/2006 Entry ID: 2007390