## United States Court of App eals
F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 0- 35 74

__ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *
* App el le e, *
* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s v. * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e * W es te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i. Dale Sco tt Olt en , Sr., *
* [UNPUBLISHED] App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _ Su bm it te d: Marc h 2 , 20 11 Fi le d: Marc h 7 , 20 11

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re MELLOY, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ _ PER CURI AM.

Dale Olt en pl ead ed gu il ty to be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of fir earm s in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( c)(1 ) an d 92 4( e) (Co un t 1) , an d po s s e s s i n g s to le n fir earm s in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 92 2( j) (Co un t 2)

. The di s t r i c t c o ur t se nt en ced hi m to 1

co nc ur ren t pr is on te rm s of 23 5 m on th s on Co un t 1 an d 12 0 m on th s on Co un t 2, an d 5 y ears of su pe rv is ed rel eas e. His co un se l ha s fil ed a br ie f un de r And ers v. Cal ifo rn ia , 38 6 U.S

. 7 3 8 ( 1 9 6 7) , se ek in g to wit hd raw; st at in g th at Olt en sh ou ld be al lo wed to wit hd raw hi s pl ea be cau se of erro rs at th e pl ea he ari ng , se e Fed

. R. Cri m

.

The Hon or ab le Nan et te K. La u gh rey, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 W es te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.P. 11 ; an d arg ui ng th at th e co ur t co m m it te d pr oc ed ur al erro r in se nt en ci ng Olt en an d im po se d an un reas on ab le se nt en ce be cau se th e co ur t ov ers ta te d th e am ou nt of st ol en pr op ert y fou nd at Ol te n’s re si de nc e.

W e fin d no in di cat io n th at th e un ob jecte d- to Ru le 11 erro rs in flu en ced Olt en ’s de ci si on to pl ead gu il ty, se e Uni te d St at es v. Dom in gu ez Be n i t e z , 54 2 U.S. 74 , 83 (2 00 4) (p la in -err or rev ie w), an d we co nc lu de th at Olt en ’s req ue st to w i t h dr aw hi s pl ea is no t co gn iz ab le on ap pe al , se e Uni te d St at es v. Mu rp hy, 89 9 F.2 d 71 4, 71 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 ). Fu rth er, w e do no t agre e th at th e di st ric t co ur t ov ers ta te d th e am ou nt of st ol en pr op ert y , an d we co nc lu de th at th e co ur t to ok in to acc o u nt al l th e rel ev an t

se nt en ci ng fact or s, co m

m it te d no pr oc ed ur al erro r, an d i mp o s e d a su bs ta nt iv el y
reas on ab le se nt en ce. See Gall v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2 U.S. 38 , 51 (2 00 7) (in rev ie win g
se n t e nc e, ap pe ll at e co ur t fir st en su res th at di st ric t co ur t co m m it te d no si gn ifi can t pr oc ed ur al erro r, an d th en co ns id ers su bs ta nt iv e r e a s o n a b le ne ss of se nt en ce un de r ab us e-o f-d is cret io n st an da rd ; if se nt en ce is wit hi n Gui de li ne s ran ge , ap pe ll at e co ur t

m ay a p p ly pr es um

pt io n of reas on ab le ne ss ); Uni te d St at es v. Haack , 40 3 F.3 d 99 7, 10 04 (8t h C ir. 2 00 5) (de sc rib in g a bu se of d is cret io n)

.

Hav in g rev ie wed th e reco rd un de r Pen so n v. Ohi o, 48 8 U.S. 75 (1 98 8) , we fin d

no no nf riv ol ou s is su es

. Acco rd in gl y , we gr an t co un se l le av e to wit hd raw, an d w e affi rm th e jud gm en t.

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-