United States of America v. Patrick Eugene Allen

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 14-1222
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Patrick Eugene Allen
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
____________
Submitted: August 5, 2014
Filed: August 7, 2014
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Patrick Allen directly appeals the sentence the district court imposed after he1
pled guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a
The Honorable James Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern1
District of Arkansas.

-- 1 of 2 --

brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Allen’s below-
Guidelines-range sentence is substantively unreasonable.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an
unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Lazarski, 560 F.3d 731, 733 (8th Cir.
2009) (substantive reasonableness of sentence is reviewed for abuse of discretion;
where district court varied downward from Guidelines range, it was “nearly
inconceivable” that court abused its discretion in not varying downward further). In
addition, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm.
As for counsel’s motion to withdraw, we conclude that allowing counsel to
withdraw at this time would not be consistent with the Eighth Circuit’s 1994
Amendment to Part V of the Plan to Implement the Criminal Justice Act of 1964. We
therefore deny counsel’s motion to withdraw as premature, without prejudice to
counsel refiling the motion upon fulfilling the duties set forth in the Amendment.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --