United States v. Michael Eden, No. 18-2169 (8th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Court Description: Per Curiam. Before Loken, Kelly, and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - Anders. Sentence below the calculated Guidelines range is not substantively unreasonable. [ March 07, 2019

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-2169 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Michael Eden lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Joplin ____________ Submitted: February 27, 2019 Filed: March 8, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Michael Eden directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to a child-pornography charge and the district court1 sentenced him below the calculated Guidelines range. 1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. We have carefully reviewed the district court’s sentencing decision and find no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461–62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Moreover, we have independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and conclude there are no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, 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.