United States v. James Boesen, Jr.

08-3842Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitMar 31, 2010

Full text

1The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Arkansas.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-3802
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Eastern District of Arkansas.
Dobie Lee Brown, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: March 10, 2010
Filed: March 15, 2010
___________
Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
After Dobie Brown pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the possession with
intent to distribute of 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing cocaine
base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, the district court 1
sentenced him to 151 months in prison and 5 years of supervised release. On appeal,
Brown’s counsel has moved to withdraw, filing a brief under Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Brown has filed a pro se supplemental brief. Having
carefully reviewed the record and the submissions on appeal, we affirm.

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
We address seriatim the arguments raised in the Anders and pro se briefs: (1)
any issue as to Brown’s competency to plead guilty is not properly raised for the first
time in this direct criminal appeal, see United States v. Murphy, 899 F.2d 714, 716
(8th Cir. 1990); (2) Brown was represented by counsel throughout these proceedings,
and any issue regarding ineffective assistance is not properly before us, see United
States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006); (3) Brown
exercised his right of allocution; and (4) his sentence, which falls within the advisory
Guidelines range, is not unreasonable, see United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455,
461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc).
Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find
no nonfrivolous issues for review. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and we
grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.