United States v. Dustin Dimmick


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Diana E. Murphy and Kermit E. Bye (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4325598-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Jim K. McGough. [4374294] [15-2904]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-2904 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Dustin Allen Dimmick lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Ft. Dodge ____________ Submitted: March 1, 2016 Filed: March 4, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Dustin Allen Dimmick directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of firearms. His counsel 1 1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. Appellate Case: 15-2904 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/04/2016 Entry ID: 4374294 has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Dimmick was incompetent to plead guilty because he was not provided access to a law library. We conclude that access to legal materials was not required because Dimmick was represented by counsel. Cf. Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 828 (1977) (inmate must have access either to adequate law library or to persons trained in law); Bear v. Kautzky, 305 F.3d 802, 806 (8th Cir. 2002) (there is no one prescribed method of ensuring inmate access to courts). 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 judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 15-2904 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/04/2016 Entry ID: 4374294

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?