Background
Alexander Evans appealed his sentences following a guilty plea to receipt of child pornography and the revocation of his supervised release for a prior offense. His counsel moved to withdraw, citing Anders v. California, and challenged the substantive reasonableness of both sentences.
The court’s reasoning
The court concluded that neither sentence was an abuse of discretion. Regarding the new sentence, the court rejected the challenge to the weight assigned to factors in arriving at a within-Guidelines sentence of three hundred twenty-four months. Regarding the revocation sentence, the court found no error in imposing an above-Guidelines term of twenty-four months primarily based on Evans’s history on supervised release. After reviewing the record under Penson v. Ohio, the court found no nonfrivolous issues.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Eighth Circuit’s deference to district courts in sentencing within or above the Guidelines when factors are properly weighed, particularly in child pornography cases and supervised release revocations.