United States of America v. Jamal Wiley

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-3207
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Jamal Wiley
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central
____________
Submitted: July 28, 2025
Filed: August 7, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Jamal Wiley appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he
pleaded guilty to a firearm offense. His counsel has requested leave to withdraw, and
1The Honorable James M. Moody Jr., United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Arkansas.

-- 1 of 2 --

has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the
sentence as substantively 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 clearly err in weighing the relevant factors.
See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc)
(sentences are reviewed for substantive reasonableness under deferential
abuse-of-discretion standard; abuse of discretion occurs when court fails to consider
relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits
clear error of judgment in weighing appropriate factors).
We have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant
counsel leave to withdraw, and affirm.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --