United States v. Corey Benjamin

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Michael J. Melloy and Duane Benton (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [3928120-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Gary R. Wolf. [4005448] [12-2164]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 12-2164
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Corey James Benjamin
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
____________
Submitted: February 13, 2013
Filed: February 15, 2013
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Corey Benjamin appeals after he pled guilty to a firearm offense, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), and 924(e), and the district court1 sentenced him
1

The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.

Appellate Case: 12-2164

Page: 1

Date Filed: 02/15/2013 Entry ID: 4005448

to fifteen years in prison, the statutory minimum. His counsel has filed a brief under
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), requesting leave to withdraw.
Benjamin’s own admissions at his change-of-plea hearing established that he
had violated 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and that he had at least three previous convictions
for separate offenses within the terms of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Thus, after carefully and
independently reviewing the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75
(1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for review. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(e) (person who violates § 922(g)(1) and has three previous convictions for
violent felony or serious drug offense, or both, committed on different occasions from
one another, shall be imprisoned not less than 15 years); United States v. Watts, 553
F.3d 603, 604 (8th Cir. 2009) (per curiam) (“District courts lack the authority to
reduce sentences below congressionally-mandated statutory minimums.”) (citation
omitted).
Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 12-2164

Page: 2

Date Filed: 02/15/2013 Entry ID: 4005448