United States v. Raul Guzman
Filing
PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Pasco M. Bowman and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4037937-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr.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]
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[Unpublished]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?