USA v. Johnny Cornelious, No. 06-3693 (8th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - criminal law and sentencing. Matters to which defense counsel made and withdrew objections below - the application of the an aggravating-role enhancement and the calculation of defendant's criminal history score - were deemed abandoned and would not be reviewed on appeal; claims of ineffective assistance of counsel should be brought in a Section 2255 proceeding.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-3693 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Johnny L. Cornelious, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: November 6, 2007 Filed: November 13, 2007 ___________ Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. After Johnny L. Cornelious (Cornelious) pled guilty to distributing more than 5 grams of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), the district court1 sentenced Cornelious to 87 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal, Cornelious s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and moved to withdraw. Cornelious filed a pro se supplemental brief. For the reasons discussed below, we reject all of the arguments raised on appeal, and we grant counsel s withdrawal motion. 1 The Honorable Harry F. Barnes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. First, the sentencing transcript shows Cornelious was held responsible for only 5-20 grams of cocaine base, consistent with the amounts in the indictment and plea agreement. Second, Cornelious s claim he was never provided with a copy of the presentence report is not supported by the record. Third, a direct criminal appeal is not a vehicle to remedy an alleged information leak by the government that has caused a defendant past hardship in prison. Fourth, matters to which defense counsel made and withdrew objections below--the application of an aggravating-role enhancement and the calculation of the criminal history score--are deemed intentionally relinquished or abandoned and need not be reviewed on appeal. See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733 (1993); United States v. Tulk, 171 F.3d 596, 600 (8th Cir. 1999). Fifth, Cornelious s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must be raised, if at all, in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 827 (8th Cir. 2006). After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. We affirm the judgment of the district court and 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.
