United States v. Randall West, No. 16-1556 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Smith, Benton and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant did not object to the presentence report's restitution calculation so his challenge to the order is reviewed under the plain error standard; the order is affirmed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1556 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Randall Acton West lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville ____________ Submitted: October 26, 2016 Filed: December 12, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Randall Acton West pled guilty to failure to file individual income tax returns, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. He appeals the restitution order imposed by the district court.1 Counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and moved to withdraw. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. This court reviews for plain error the challenge to the restitution order, as West did not object to the presentence report’s restitution calculations, and finds no error. See United States v. Louper-Morris, 672 F.3d 539, 566 (8th Cir. 2012) (reviewing restitution order for plain error because defendant did not challenge it at sentencing); United States v. Perry, 714 F.3d 570, 577 (8th Cir. 2013) (holding that district court may order defendant to pay restitution to IRS in connection with Title 26 offense; district court’s order to pay “full amount” of tax loss, including interest, was appropriate); United States v. Cullen, 432 F.3d 903, 905 (8th Cir. 2006) (district court may rely on unobjected-to facts in PSR). This court has reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and finds no non-frivolous issues for appeal. The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. -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.
