US v. Zetino-Rivera

Filing 920080225

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-4819

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEREMIAS NATHAN ZETINO-RIVERA, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:05-cr-00030-RLV)

Submitted:

February 21, 2008

Decided:

February 25, 2008

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert H. Hale, Jr., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Jeremias Nathan Zetino-Rivera pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to one count of using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to, and possessing a firearm in furtherance of, a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2000). The district court sentenced Zetino-Rivera to the

statutory minimum of sixty months of imprisonment. timely appealed.

Zetino-Rivera

On appeal, counsel has filed an Anders* brief, in which he states there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but questions whether the district court acted unreasonably when it failed to consider the evidence offered by Zetino-Rivera in support of his motion for a variance was below of the his statutory right to minimum file a sentence. pro se

Zetino-Rivera

advised

supplemental brief, but has not filed a brief. declined to file a brief. Zetino-Rivera's sentence. We affirm. sentence was the

The Government

mandatory

minimum

The district court properly recognized that, absent a

substantial assistance motion filed by the government pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(e) (West 2000 & Supp. 2007), it lacked authority to sentence Zetino-Rivera below the statutory mandatory minimum sentence. Cir. 2006). See United States v. Allen, 450 F.3d 565, 568-69 (4th

*

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). - 2 -

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. therefore affirm Zetino-Rivera's conviction and sentence. We This

court requires that counsel inform Zetino-Rivera, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. filed, but If Zetino-Rivera requests that a petition be believes that such a petition would be

counsel

frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a

copy thereof was served on Zetino-Rivera. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

- 3 -