From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Walls

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jan 31, 2011
407 F. App'x 996 (8th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-2592.

Submitted: January 18, 2011.

Filed: January 31, 2011.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Eliza Fryer Williams, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, St. Louis, MO, for Appellee.

Nanci McCarthy, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.

Maurice Walls, Florence, CO, pro se.

Before MELLOY, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.


[UNPUBLISHED]


Maurice Walls appeals the prison sentence the district court imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court determined he was an armed career criminal, see 18 U.S.C. § 924(e); U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4, and imposed the statutory minimum prison term of 180 months. In a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel asks to withdraw and argues that 3 criminal history points should not have been assessed for prior convictions for which there was no evidence that Walls had been represented by counsel or had waived counsel.

The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

We find this argument unavailing because subtracting 3 criminal history points from Walls's total of 18 would not have affected his sentence. See U.S.S.G. Ch. 5 Pt. A (table) (Category VI criminal history for 13 or more criminal history points). Further, having properly determined that Walls was an armed career criminal, the district court had no discretion to sentence him below the statutory minimum. See United States v. Chacon, 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003) (only authority to depart from statutory minimum is in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) and (f), which apply only when government moves for departure based on substantial assistance or defendant qualifies for safety-valve relief).

After reviewing the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we allow counsel to withdraw, and we affirm.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Walls

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jan 31, 2011
407 F. App'x 996 (8th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Walls

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Maurice WALLS, Appellant

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Jan 31, 2011

Citations

407 F. App'x 996 (8th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

United States v. Somerville

The sentence he received was the shortest that the sentencing court could impose—his personal history and…