United States v. Aaron Miles, No. 16-4510 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam. Before Colloton, Bowman, and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - Anders. District court acted within its discretion in varying upward from the advisory Guidelines range. Sentence was not unreasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-4510 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Aaron Lamonte Miles lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport ____________ Submitted: August 29, 2017 Filed: October 19, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Aaron Lamonte Miles pleaded guilty to failing to register as a sex offender. His written plea agreement included an appeal waiver that applied to his conviction but not to his sentence. In this appeal, Miles’s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of the sentence imposed by the District Court.1 We conclude that the District Court acted within its discretion by varying upward from the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines range. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions). The court discussed several 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, considered Miles’s sentencing arguments, and thoroughly explained its disagreement with the parties’ joint recommendation of a lower sentence. See United States v. Mangum, 625 F.3d 466, 470 (8th Cir. 2010) (explaining that a sentence is not unreasonable if the district court makes “an individualized assessment based on the facts presented” and addresses “the defendant’s proffered information in its consideration of the § 3553(a) factors” (citations to quoted cases omitted)). We have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver. We affirm the judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern 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.
