Case Name: UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Montreal HEFFNER Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-26
Citations: 699 F. App'x 584
Docket Number: No. 16-4073
Parties: UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Montreal HEFFNER Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 699
Pages: 584–584

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Montreal HEFFNER Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-4073
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: October 18, 2017
Filed: October 26, 2017
Martin Joseph McLaughlin, Lisa C. Williams, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Iowa, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Christopher Montreal Heffner, Pro Se
Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Christopher Montreal Heffner directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, and the district court sentenced him within the calculated Guidelines range. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the district court erroneously applied an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), and imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence.
We conclude that Heffner's arguments challenging the section 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement are foreclosed by this court's precedents. See, e.g., United States v. Walker, 771 F.3d 449, 452-53 (8th Cir. 2014). We further conclude that Heffner's within-Guidelines-range sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions; if sentence is within Guidelines range, appellate court may, but is not required to, apply presumption of reasonableness).
Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.