United States v. Timothy Colhour


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Raymond W. Gruender, Morris S. Arnold and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4353742-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Jose Alfaro and Ms. Anna Marie Williams. [4390204] [15-3892]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3892 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Timothy Colhour lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville ____________ Submitted: April 15, 2016 Filed: April 20, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Timothy Colhour directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to distributing methamphetamine and using a firearm during 1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. Appellate Case: 15-3892 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2016 Entry ID: 4390204 and in relation to a drug trafficking offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the district court abused its discretion by denying a downward variance based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying a variance, as nothing in the record indicated the within-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable, and the court adequately explained its reasons for denying it. See United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2013) (under substantive review, district court abuses its discretion if it fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing factors); United States v. Cook, 698 F.3d 667, 670 (8th Cir. 2012) (treating within-Guidelines sentence as presumptively reasonable on appeal); United States v. Gonzalez, 573 F.3d 600, 608 (8th Cir. 2009) (upholding denial of downward variance where court considered sentencing factors and properly explained rationale). 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: 15-3892 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2016 Entry ID: 4390204

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?