United States v. Donald Gorge


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: KERMIT E. BYE, STEVEN M. COLLOTON and RAYMOND W. GRUENDER (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [3866540-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Ms. Denese R Fletcher. [3899213] [11-2732]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-2732 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Donald Douglas Gorge, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: April 5, 2012 Filed: April 10, 2012 ___________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In accordance with a plea agreement, Donald Gorge pleaded guilty to attempted receipt of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2). This subjected him to a statutory imprisonment range of 5-20 years. The district court1 calculated a Guidelines range of 210-240 months, and sentenced him to 180 months in prison. On appeal, Gorge’s counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which she seeks to withdraw and challenges the reasonableness of the 1 The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Appellate Case: 11-2732 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/10/2012 Entry ID: 3899213 sentence. In supplemental pro se submissions, Gorge challenges his sentence and asserts that counsel was ineffective. We conclude the district court committed no procedural error in sentencing Gorge, and--in light of the evidence presented--imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. Alvarez, 478 F.3d 864, 868-69 (8th Cir. 2007); United States v. Belflower, 390 F.3d 560, 562 (8th Cir. 2004) (per curiam). We decline to review Gorge’s ineffective-assistance claim in this direct appeal. See United States v. Looking Cloud, 419 F.3d 781, 788-89 (8th Cir. 2005). Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 11-2732 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/10/2012 Entry ID: 3899213

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?