United States of America v. Aaron Sheets

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-2281
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Aaron Sheets
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville
____________
Submitted: January 6, 2025
Filed: January 10, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Aaron Sheets appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he
pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.
1The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Arkansas.

-- 1 of 2 --

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing the district court erred in applying a 2-level
enhancement for possession of a dangerous weapon.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not err in applying
the enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1). See United States v. Rodriguez, 484
F.3d 1006, 1014 (8th Cir. 2007) (reviewing application of Guidelines de novo and
factual findings for clear error). The district court correctly determined that the
airsoft rifle was a dangerous weapon, and the court did not clearly err in finding it
was connected to the drug offense. See United States v. Shelton, 82 F.4th 1294,
1295-96 (8th Cir. 2023) (BB gun was “dangerous weapon” within meaning of
§ 2D1.1(b)(1)); United States v. Peroceski, 520 F.3d 886, 888-89 (8th Cir. 2008) (for
§ 2D1.1(b)(1) to apply, government must simply show that it is not clearly
improbable that weapon was connected to drug offense).
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
affirm.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --