United States v. Patrick 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Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: August 5, 2014 Filed: August 7, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.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 court1 imposed after he pled guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a 1 The Honorable James Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 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-