United States v. Raul Guzman


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Pasco M. Bowman and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4037937-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. John P. Messina. [4066639] [13-1956]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-1956 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Raul Hernandez Guzman lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines ____________ Submitted: August 7, 2013 Filed: August 20, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Raul Guzman appeals the ten-month prison sentence that the District Court1 imposed upon his guilty plea to illegally reentering the United States after having 1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. Appellate Case: 13-1956 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/20/2013 Entry ID: 4066639 been previously deported following a felony conviction. 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(1). Guzman’s counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Guzman’s sentence was unreasonable and that he should have been sentenced to time served. We conclude that the sentence—which is at the bottom of the uncontested Guidelines range—is not unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Further, having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 13-1956 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/20/2013 Entry ID: 4066639

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?