United States of America v. Joseph Kenneth Henry

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-2020
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Joseph Kenneth Henry
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
___________________________
No. 25-2028
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Joseph Kenneth Henry
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeals from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Southern
____________
Submitted: January 15, 2026
Filed: January 21, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________

-- 1 of 2 --

Before SMITH, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, Joseph Henry appeals his sentence after a jury
convicted him of firearm and escape offenses in two separate cases--instituted by
separate indictments--which were consolidated prior to trial, and the district court1
sentenced him to 70 months in prison. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw,
and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the
sentence.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a
substantively unreasonable sentence. 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). The record establishes that the district court adequately
considered the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v.
Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (on appeal, within-Guidelines-range
sentence may be presumed reasonable).
We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we
affirm the judgment, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
1The Honorable Lawrence L. Piersol, then United States District Judge for the
District of South Dakota, took inactive status on July 31, 2025.
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --