Court Opinion

ID: 9803771
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 16:00:47.796175+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:03:20.397290
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 23-1429
                         ___________________________

                             United States of America,

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

                                           v.

                     Linder Kai Divos, also known as Lindo,

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
                                        ____________

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

                            Submitted: August 23, 2023
                              Filed: August 31, 2023
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

       Linder Divos appeals after he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses, and
the district court1 imposed a sentence below the advisory sentencing guideline range.

      1
       The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for
the Southern District of Iowa.
His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967). The brief challenges the determination that Divos’s prior state drug
and assault convictions qualified as predicate offenses under the career-offender
guidelines, and argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable.

       After careful de novo review, we conclude that Divos’s challenges to the
career-offender enhancement are foreclosed by this court’s precedent. This court has
held that an assault conviction under Iowa Code § 708.2(1) constitutes a crime of
violence for career-offender purposes, see United States v. Quigley, 943 F.3d 390,
395 (8th Cir. 2019); and we conclude that the Illinois drug conviction qualifies as a
controlled substance offense, see United States v. Henderson, 11 F.4th 713, 718-19
(8th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1696 (2022). We further conclude that
Divos’s sentence was not unreasonable, as there is no indication that the court
overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant
factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors. See
United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62, 461-62, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en
banc); United States v. Stults, 575 F.3d 834, 849 (8th Cir. 2009).

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

                                         -2-