United States v. Brooks, 17-6095

John Brooks was convicted in 1996 of possession with intent to distribute PCP and received 144 months imprisonment plus five years’ supervised release.
After release, Brooks pleaded guilty in Oklahoma state court to Indecent or Lewd Acts with a Child Under 14 and received a lengthy state sentence.
The government petitioned to revoke Brooks’s federal supervised release based on the state conviction; the Probation Office calculated a Guidelines range of 24–30 months.
At the revocation hearing Brooks admitted violating his supervised release; the district court sentenced him to 30 months’ imprisonment and ten years’ supervised release.
Brooks appealed; appointed counsel moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, asserting no non-frivolous issues on appeal. No responses were filed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Brooks can challenge revocation given his stipulation to violating supervised release	Brooks might contest voluntariness of his state plea/stipulation	Government argues stipulation forecloses challenge to revocation	Court held stipulation and guilty plea were not shown involuntary; Brooks cannot challenge revocation
Whether the revocation sentence was procedurally unreasonable	Brooks could argue court failed to consider § 3553(a) factors or misapplied Guidelines	Government argues court considered § 3553(a) and imposed a within-Guidelines sentence	Court found no procedural error; judge properly considered factors
Whether the revocation sentence was substantively unreasonable	Brooks could argue sentence was too harsh given circumstances	Government argues sentence is within Guidelines and therefore presumptively reasonable	Court held within-Guidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable and presumption not rebutted
Whether counsel properly moved to withdraw under Anders	Brooks could claim counsel failed to identify possible issues	Counsel contends a conscientious Anders brief was filed and no meritorious issues exist	Court granted counsel’s Anders motion after independent review and dismissed the appeal

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (permits counsel to move to withdraw when appeal is frivolous if brief identifies possible issues)
United States v. Calderon, 428 F.3d 928 (10th Cir. 2005) (discussing Anders procedures)
United States v. Wright, 43 F.3d 491 (10th Cir. 1994) (stipulation to violation forecloses challenge to revocation absent involuntariness)
United States v. Kristl, 437 F.3d 1050 (10th Cir. 2006) (within-Guidelines sentences are presumptively reasonable)