United States v. Aurelio Hernandez-Guinac
This text of 622 F. App'x 593 (United States v. Aurelio Hernandez-Guinac) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Aurelio Hernandez-Guinac pled guilty to being found after illegal reentry, and at sentencing, the district court 1 granted the government’s motion for an upward departure under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(a) based on an under-represented criminal history, noting that the sentence could be viewed alternatively as an upward variance based on a weighing of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. Hernandez appeals, and his counsel has moved to withdraw, arguing in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), that the 21-month sentence is substantively unreasonable.
After careful review, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in granting an upward departure, see United States v. Vasquez, 552 F.3d 734, 738-39 (8th Cir.2009) (discussing applicability of upward departures under § 4A1.3(a)), and the sentence is.not substantively unreasonable, see United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc) (abuse-of-discretion review). Further, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.
*594 The judgment is affirmed, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
. The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
622 F. App'x 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-aurelio-hernandez-guinac-ca8-2015.