United States v. Casey Lindus, No. 17-3504 (8th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case
Court Description: Per Curiam. Before Wollman, Bowman, and Erickson, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - Anders. Sentence at bottom of calculated Guidelines range is not substantively unreasonable. [ August 16, 2018
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 17-3504 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Casey Joel Lindus lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport ____________ Submitted: July 30, 2018 Filed: August 17, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Casey Lindus directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to a felon-in-possession offense, and was sentenced by the district court1 to a prison term at the bottom of the 1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. calculated Guidelines range. His 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 Lindus’s sentence. Our review of the sentencing proceedings satisfies us that the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (sentences are reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard; discussing substantive reasonableness); see also United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (on appeal, withinGuidelines-range sentence may be presumed reasonable). In addition, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. There having been no response by counsel to the certification requested by the court’s July 28, 2018, order, his motion for leave to withdraw is denied. ______________________________ -2-