United States v. Joshua Beach, No. 19-3506 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam. Before Colloton, Wollman, and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - Anders. District court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant to a below-Guidelines sentence; the statements at his plea hearing establish that the plea was knowing and voluntary.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-3506 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Joshua Thomas Beach lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines ____________ Submitted: August 12, 2020 Filed: August 17, 2020 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, WOLLMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Joshua Thomas Beach pled guilty to firearm and drug offenses. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. Counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he seeks permission to withdraw and asserts the district court committed reversible error during the change-of-plea hearing. He also asserts Beach’s sentence is substantively unreasonable. This court concludes that the district court1 did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Beach. The district court imposed a below-Guidelines sentence. See United States v. McCauley, 715 F.3d 1119, 1127 (8th Cir. 2013) (noting that when district court has varied below Guidelines range, it is “nearly inconceivable” that court abused its discretion in not varying downward further). The record reflects the district court properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (appellate court first ensures no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard). To the extent Beach challenges the voluntariness of his guilty plea, this court concludes that his statements at the plea hearing establish the plea was knowing and voluntary. See Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997) (defendant’s representations during plea-taking carry strong presumption of verity). The court has independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. The judgment is affirmed. Counsel is granted leave to withdraw. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, 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.
