United States v. Michael Gray, No. 22-2287 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Melloy, and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable. [ November 09, 2022 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2287 ___________________________ United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee, v. Michael Gray, lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant. ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central ____________ Submitted: October 31, 2022 Filed: November 10, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Michael Gray appeals a sentence imposed by the district court1 after Gray pleaded guilty to a child pornography offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw 1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of the sentence. We conclude that Gray’s sentence was not unreasonable, as there is no indication that the district court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors, see United States v. Pickar, 666 F.3d 1167, 1169 (8th Cir. 2012), and the court made an individualized assessment based on the facts presented in its consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, see United States v. Mangum, 625 F.3d 466, 470 (8th Cir. 2010). 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, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________ -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.
