Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mark MINK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-06-06
Citations: 559 F. App'x 605
Docket Number: No. 13-3279
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mark MINK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before BYE, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 559
Pages: 605–605

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mark MINK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-3279.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: June 6, 2014.
Filed: June 6, 2014.
Allison Waldrip Bragg, Benjamin Wulff, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
Mark Mink, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.
Before BYE, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark Howard Mink directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he pled guilty to coercing and enticing a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Counsel argues that the sentence was substantively unreasonable. Mink has filed a pro se supplemental submission, in which he claims counsel was ineffective. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
After careful review, this court concludes that Mink's sentence was not substantively unreasonable, as the 120-month sentence imposed was the statutory minimum sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) (whoever commits offense shall be imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life); United States v. Woods, 717 F.3d 654, 659 (8th Cir.2013) (rejecting argument that sentence was substantively unreasonable, as defendant received statutory minimum sentence); United States v. Watts, 553 F.3d 603, 604 (8th Cir.2009) (per curiam) (district court lacks authority to reduce sentence below statutory minimum). This court declines to consider Mink's ineffective-assistance claim in this direct criminal appeal. See Woods, 717 F.3d at 657.
The judgment is affirmed. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.
. The Honorable P.K. Holmes, III, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.