United States v. Ronald Mazza, No. 15-2452 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Arnold and Smith, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The sentencing decision was procedurally sound and substantively reasonable. [ March 09, 2016
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-2452 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Ronald Mazza lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield ____________ Submitted: March 4, 2016 Filed: March 10, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Ronald Mazza directly appeals the below-Guidelines-range sentence the district court imposed after he pled guilty to sex offenses. His counsel has moved to 1 1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is procedurally and substantively unsound. Mazza has moved for appointment of new counsel on appeal. We have carefully reviewed the district court’s sentencing decision and find no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Moreover, we have independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted, the motion for new counsel is denied, and the judgment is affirmed. ______________________________ -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.
