Opinion
21-2758
05-19-2022
United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Michael Shawn McGuire Defendant-Appellant
Unpublished
Submitted: May 16, 2022
Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Eastern
Before SHEPHERD, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM
Michael McGuire received a 120-month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty to four counts of cyberstalking. See 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2). An Anders brief suggests that the sentence is substantively unreasonable and that he should not have received a fine. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). A pro se supplemental brief raises two other issues.
Neither the sentence nor the fine poses a problem. The record establishes that the district court sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and did not rely on an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). The record further establishes that the district court did not clearly err when it found that McGuire was "able to pay [the] fine." United States v. Allmon, 500 F.3d 800, 807 (8th Cir. 2007) (quoting U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2(a)).
The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
McGuire's pro se arguments fare no better. He forfeited his double-jeopardy argument when he pleaded guilty, see United States v. Broce, 488 U.S. 563, 571 (1989); and there has been no impermissible double counting, see United States v. Jones, 951 F.3d 918, 919 -20 (8th Cir. 2020).
Finally, we have independently reviewed the record and conclude that no other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82 -83 (1988). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw.