Court Opinion

ID: 9889766
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-11 16:00:46.941043+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.160536
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 23-1550
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                                    Craig Reuter

                      lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                      ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                    for the Northern District of Iowa - Eastern
                                  ____________

                            Submitted: October 6, 2023
                             Filed: October 11, 2023
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

     Craig Reuter appeals the within-Guidelines-range sentence the district court1
imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. His

      1
       The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.
counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

      Upon careful review, we conclude the sentence was not substantively
unreasonable, as the district court properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors
including Reuter’s mitigating factors, did not overlook a relevant factor, or commit
a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors, see United States v.
Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc); and the court imposed a prison
term within the Guidelines range, see United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760
(8th Cir. 2014). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v.
Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

      Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                     ______________________________

                                         -2-