United States v. Hyman Leville Steele , 10 F. App'x 382 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 00-3122
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    v.                                 * District of Nebraska.
    *
    Hyman Leville Steele,                    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    also known as Hymie Steele,              *
    *
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 10, 2001
    Filed: May 15, 2001
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, FAGG, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Hyman Leville Steele pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with
    intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine
    base, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. § 846
    . The district court,1 using an unobjected-to drug
    quantity of at least 9.52 grams, sentenced Steele to 60 months imprisonment, the
    statutory minimum, see 
    21 U.S.C. § 841
    (b)(1)(B), and to 5 years supervised release.
    On appeal, Steele’s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    1
    The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the District of Nebraska.
    (1967), arguing that Steele should have been held responsible for only 3-4 grams of
    cocaine base, and that his sentence violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 
    530 U.S. 466
    (2000).
    Steele’s arguments are unpersuasive. Because his sentence does not exceed the
    20-year statutory maximum prison term for a non-quantity-based drug offense, it does
    not violate Apprendi. See United States v. Aguayo-Delgado, 
    220 F.3d 926
    , 934 (8th
    Cir.), cert. denied, 
    121 S. Ct. 600
     (2000). Further, in his plea agreement, Steele
    stipulated that he was responsible for 5-20 grams of cocaine base. See United States
    v. Nguyen, 
    46 F.3d 781
    , 783 (8th Cir. 1995).
    Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
     (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm
    and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-