United States v. Hasheem Johnson, No. 19-3640 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-3640 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Hasheem Urell Latwan Johnson lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines ____________ Submitted: January 12, 2021 Filed: January 22, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Hasheem Johnson appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to two firearm offenses. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has 1 The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. The court properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and there is no indication that the court considered an improper or irrelevant factor or committed a clear error in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2013) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions). Further, the court imposed a sentence within the advisory sentencing guidelines range. See United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (stating that a within-guidelines-range sentence is presumed reasonable). Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion and affirm. ______________________________ -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.
