United States v. Snofawn Torres-Webber


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Pasco M. Bowman and Steven M. Colloton (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4290849-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. John D. Jacobsen. [4354483] [15-2012]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-2012 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Snofawn Torres-Webber lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________ Submitted: December 25, 2015 Filed: January 11, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Snofawn Torres-Webber appeals from the sentence imposed by the District Court after she pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit robbery. Her counsel has 1 1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. Appellate Case: 15-2012 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/11/2016 Entry ID: 4354483 moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence and conditions of supervised release are unreasonable. We conclude that the within-Guidelines sentence is not substantively unreasonable. United States v. Cook, 698 F.3d 667, 670 (8th Cir. 2012) (standards of review). Because Torres-Webber did not object to the conditions of supervised release at sentencing, we review only for plain error. See United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475, 478 (8th Cir. 2010); see also Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b). There is no such error. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (noting that additional conditions of supervised release must be “reasonably related” to certain 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, involve “no greater deprivation of liberty than reasonably necessary,” and be consistent with any relevant Sentencing Commission policy statements). We have reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the sentence, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 15-2012 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/11/2016 Entry ID: 4354483

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?