United States v. Stacy Ba, No. 11-1474 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal Case - Anders. Record does not support that decision by government not to move for sentence reduction was improper.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-1474 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Stacy Bass, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: October 4, 2011 Filed: November 10, 2011 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Stacy Bass pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute 500 grams of a mixture containing at least 50 grams of pure methamphetamine, see 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) (10-year minimum prison term), and 846; and distributing, and aiding and abetting others in the distribution of, approximately 27.77 grams of a mixture containing 11.66 grams of pure methamphetamine, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. The district court1 sentenced Bass to concurrent terms of 120 months in prison. Her counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under 1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that the government acted in bad faith in refusing to move under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) and U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 for a sentence reduction based on Bass s substantial assistance. The challenge is unavailing because there is no indication in the record that the government s decision not to move for a sentence reduction was improper. See United States v. Perez, 526 F.3d 1135, 1138-39 (8th Cir. 2008); United States v. Wattree, 431 F.3d 618, 624 (8th Cir. 2005); United States v. Chacon, 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003). Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 448 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel s motion, and affirm the judgment. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
