United States of America v. Christopher Michael Goerdt

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 21-1984
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Christopher Michael Goerdt
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern
____________
Submitted: February 14, 2022
Filed: March 1, 2022
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Christopher Goerdt appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he
pled guilty to bank fraud, wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and misapplication by
1The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, then District Judge, now Chief Judge,
United States District Court the Southern District of Iowa.

-- 1 of 2 --

a bank officer. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging several findings underlying the
district court’s United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”)
calculations.
Upon careful review, we conclude the district court did not commit any
procedural error in sentencing Goerdt. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455,
461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (in reviewing sentence, appellate court first ensures
district court committed no significant procedural error, such as improperly
calculating Guidelines range); see also United States v. Jenkins-Watts, 574 F.3d 950,
960–61 (8th Cir. 2009) (discussing appellate review of loss determinations). Further,
having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988),
we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to
withdraw and affirm.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --