United States v. Stephen Dorsey, No. 15-1166 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Loken and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders cases. Sentences imposed on these two defendants were not substantively unreasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-1166 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Stephen Roshon Dorsey lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ___________________________ No. 15-1167 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kenneth Williams lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeals from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________ Submitted: July 1, 2015 Filed: July 7, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. These are consolidated direct criminal appeals from judgments entered by the district court.1 Stephen Dorsey and Kenneth Williams each pled guilty to distributing cocaine base within 1,000 feet of a school, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 860(a), and each was sentenced by the district court at the bottom of his calculated Guidelines range. Their attorneys have moved for leave to withdraw, and have filed briefs under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the respective sentences. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. This court concludes that the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence in either case. See United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074, 1076-77 (8th Cir. 2012) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions); see also United States v. Cook, 698 F.3d 667, 670 (8th Cir. 2012) (on appeal, applying presumption of reasonableness to within-Guidelines-range sentence). An independent review of both records reveals no nonfrivolous issues. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) The judgments in both cases are affirmed. Counsels’ motions to withdraw are granted. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. -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.
