Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
17-3097•United States of America v. Princton Sims
17-3097Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit28.06.2019
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 18-3266
___________________________
United States of America,
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,
v.
Princton Sims,
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs
____________
Submitted: June 17, 2019
Filed: June 26, 2019
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Princton Sims appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he1
pleaded guilty to possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute. His counsel
The Honorable Susan O. Hickey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for1
the Western District of Arkansas.
-- 1 of 2 --
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable, and that
former counsel was ineffective in failing to negotiate a more favorable plea
agreement.
After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its
discretion in sentencing Sims. The court properly considered the factors set forth in
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and 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 relevant factors. See United States v. Feemster,
572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Further, the court imposed the
statutory minimum sentence. See United States v. Woods, 717 F.3d 654, 659 (8th Cir.
2013). We decline to address Sims’s ineffective-assistance claim in this direct
appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir.
2006).
Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75
(1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s
motion, and affirm.
______________________________
-2-
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.