United States of America v. Timothy Paul Bush

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-1448
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Timothy Paul Bush
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern
____________
Submitted: October 3, 2023
Filed: October 6, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Timothy Bush appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he
pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and
1The Honorable Stephen H. Locher, United States District Judge for the
Southern District of Iowa.

-- 1 of 2 --

has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging Bush’s
classification as a career offender under the Guidelines and the substantive
reasonableness of the sentence. Bush has filed a pro se supplement, also contesting
his classification as a career offender.
After careful de novo review, we conclude that Bush’s challenge to the career-
offender classification is foreclosed by this court’s precedent. See United States v.
Castellanos Muratella, 956 F.3d 541, 543 (8th Cir. 2020) (standard of review). This
court has held that there is no requirement under the Guidelines that the particular
substance underlying the state offense is also controlled under a distinct federal law.
See United States v. Henderson, 11 F.4th 713, 717-19 (8th Cir. 2021). We further
conclude that the sentence is not substantively unreasonable, as the court did not
commit a clear error of judgment in weighing the appropriate sentencing factors, see
United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc); and the
sentence is below the Guidelines range, see United States v. Torres-Ojeda, 829 F.3d
1027, 1030 (8th Cir. 2016).
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 the judgment, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --