Court Opinion

ID: 9381227
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-22 15:01:17.181806+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:31.316584
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 22-3336
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                           Donnie Wayne Robinson, Jr.

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                       ____________

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

                            Submitted: March 17, 2023
                              Filed: March 22, 2023
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Donnie Robinson, Jr. appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after
he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses. His counsel has moved for leave to

      1
        The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa.
withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
arguing that the sentence was unreasonable.

       Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a
substantively unreasonable sentence, as the court properly considered the factors
listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and did not err in weighing the relevant factors. See
United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing
sentences for substantive reasonableness under deferential abuse of discretion
standard; abuse of discretion occurs when the court fails to consider relevant factor,
gives significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or commits a clear error
of judgment in weighing the appropriate factors). Further, the court imposed a
sentence below the Guidelines range. See United States v. McCauley, 715 F.3d 1119,
1127 (8th Cir. 2013) (noting that when the district court has varied below the
Guidelines range, it is “nearly inconceivable” that the court abused its discretion in
not varying further).

      We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we
affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                      ______________________________

                                         -2-