United States v. Quavo Williams, No. 23-1705 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Colloton, and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's below-guidelines range sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 23-1705 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Quavo Delmontae Williams lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________ Submitted: August 28, 2023 Filed: August 31, 2023 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Quavo Williams appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after the court vacated one count of conviction and resentenced him. His counsel has moved 1 The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. to withdraw, and has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 36 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not err in imposing the below-Guidelines sentence that Williams received. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc); United States v. Moore, 581 F.3d 681, 684 (8th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw 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.
