United States v. Juan Martinez-Chavez
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________ No. 09-2415 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Juan Martinez-Chavez, Appellant. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: April 29, 2010 Filed: May 5, 2010 ___________ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Juan Martinez-Chavez challenges the sentence that the District Court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. MartinezChavez's counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and has moved to withdraw. Upon careful review, we conclude that the District Court committed no procedural error in sentencing Martinez-Chavez and that the court imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007) (explaining that in reviewing a sentence, the appellate court first ensures The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
that the district court committed no significant procedural error and then considers the substantive reasonableness of the sentence under the abuse-of-discretion standard; if the sentence is within the Guidelines range, the appellate court may apply a presumption of reasonableness); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir.) (noting that an abuse of discretion may occur when the court fails to consider a relevant factor that should have received significant weight, gives significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or considers only appropriate factors but commits a clear error of judgment in weighing them), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 913 (2005). Having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm. ______________________________
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?