United States v. De Shane Crutcher
529 F. App'x 802
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- De Shane Von Crutcher admitted possessing and selling cocaine base while on supervised release for a prior firearms conviction.
- The District Court revoked his supervised release and imposed a 23-month revocation sentence.
- Crutcher pleaded guilty to distributing ~0.56 grams of a mixture containing cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
- The District Court sentenced him to 151 months (at the bottom of the Guidelines range), to run consecutively to the 23-month revocation term, plus 5 years supervised release.
- Counsel filed an Anders brief and moved to withdraw, arguing (1) the court abused its discretion by imposing the sentence consecutively and (2) the court improperly weighed § 3553(a) factors and refused to vary downward.
- The court of appeals conducted an independent review under Penson and considered whether any nonfrivolous issues existed for appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion by imposing the sentence consecutively to the revocation term | Crutcher: sentence should run concurrently with the 23-month revocation term | Government: court may order concurrent or consecutive under Guidelines §5G1.3(c); consecutive recommended where offense committed on supervised release | Court: no abuse of discretion; consecutive sentence reasonable and permitted by §5G1.3(c) and precedent |
| Whether the district court improperly weighed § 3553(a) factors or should have granted a downward variance | Crutcher: district court misapplied or misweighed factors and should have varied downward | Government: sentence within Guidelines is presumptively reasonable; district court adequately considered §3553(a) and explained refusal to vary | Court: no improper weighing; explanation sufficient; sentence reasonable |
| Whether any nonfrivolous issues exist to support appeal after Anders brief | Crutcher: counsel raised potential issues in Anders brief | Government: record supports sentence and procedures were proper | Court: independent review under Penson found no nonfrivolous issues; affirm and grant counsel's withdrawal subject to procedural advice to Crutcher |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedures for counsel to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) (court must independently review the record when counsel seeks to withdraw)
- United States v. Winston, 456 F.3d 861 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review for consecutive vs. concurrent sentencing under §5G1.3)
- United States v. Young, 644 F.3d 757 (8th Cir. 2011) (presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences)
- United States v. Coleman, 635 F.3d 380 (8th Cir. 2011) (district court need only explain reasons for denying a downward variance; sentence can be reasonable absent presumption if adequately explained)