Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Dana Enoch KIDD, Jr., also known as Bryan Clinton Cobb, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-08-10
Citations: 191 F. App'x 516
Docket Number: No. 05-2154
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Dana Enoch KIDD, Jr., also known as Bryan Clinton Cobb, Appellant.
Judges: Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 191
Pages: 516–517

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Dana Enoch KIDD, Jr., also known as Bryan Clinton Cobb, Appellant.
No. 05-2154.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 4, 2006.
Filed: Aug. 10, 2006.
Lajuana M. Counts, Bruce A. Rhoades, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Kansas City, MO, for Appellee.
David H. Johnson, Loughlin & Johnson, Kansas City, MO, for Appellant.
Dana Enoch Kidd, Jr., Petersburg, VA, pro se.
Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
[UNPUBLISHED]
PER CURIAM.
A jury found Dana Enoch Kidd, Jr. (Kidd) guilty of conspiring to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1). The district court sentenced him to 120 months' imprisonment and 8 years' supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 886 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and moved to withdraw, and Kidd has filed pro se supplemental briefs.
Counsel suggests that there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal. After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we agree. We have given careful consideration to the numerous arguments Kidd presents in his three pro se supplemental briefs. We conclude the eleven claims which Kidd properly raised on direct appeal are without merit. Kidd's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel should be presented (if at all) in a separate 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, thus we deny without prejudice Kidd's ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 827 (8th Cir.2006).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
. The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.