United States v. Richard William


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Raymond W. Gruender, Morris S. Arnold and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4337978-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Ms. Heather Quick. [4398626] [15-3297]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3297 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Richard Tommy Williams, also known as Richard T. Williams lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport ____________ Submitted: May 2, 2016 Filed: May 13, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Richard Williams appeals after the district court1 sentenced him to 77 months in prison and two years of supervised release upon his guilty plea to a felon-in1 The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. Appellate Case: 15-3297 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2016 Entry ID: 4398626 possession charge. Williams’s counsel has moved to withdraw, and argues in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), that the district court plainly erred in accepting the plea agreement, because the decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), affected Williams’s advisory Guidelines range. In pro se supplemental filings, Williams also relies upon Johnson to challenge his sentence. These arguments fail, because the sentence was imposed pursuant to a Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, under which Williams and the government specifically agreed to a sentence of 77 months. In fact, at the time the district court accepted the plea agreement, the parties and the court had discussed Johnson at some length, and the parties still wished to proceed with the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) agreement. See United States v. Kling, 516 F.3d 702, 704-05 (8th Cir. 2008) (defendant waived Eighth Amendment challenge to sentence imposed under Rule 11(c)(1)(C) agreement, which upon acceptance became binding on government, defendant, and district court). Having independently reviewed the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 15-3297 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2016 Entry ID: 4398626

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?