United States v. Manuel Camarillo


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Duane Benton and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4357912-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Barry D. Neal. [4434436] [15-3876]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3876 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Manuel Patrick Camarillo, also known as Sick lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville ____________ Submitted: July 22, 2016 Filed: August 5, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Manuel Camarillo directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to drug and gun charges, and the district court1 sentenced him to a within-Guidelines-range prison 1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. Appellate Case: 15-3876 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/05/2016 Entry ID: 4434436 term for the drug offenses, and a statutory-minimum consecutive prison term for the gun offense. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We conclude that Camarillo’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, see Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997), and that the district court committed no sentencing error, see United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074, 1076-77 (8th Cir. 2012). In addition, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 15-3876 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/05/2016 Entry ID: 4434436

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?