US v. Zetino-Rivera

Filing 920080225


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4819 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEREMIAS NATHAN ZETINO-RIVERA, Defendant -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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 -

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?