United States v. G. Vasquez-Rodriguez

Eighth Circuit

United States v. G. Vasquez-Rodriguez

11 F. App'x 658

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedApril 12, 2001

Docket00-2805

StatusUnpublished

This text of 11 F. App'x 658 (United States v. G. Vasquez-Rodriguez) 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.

Bluebook

United States v. G. Vasquez-Rodriguez, 11 F. App'x 658 (8th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Gerardo Vasquez-Rodriguez, a Mexican citizen, appeals the sentence of 66 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release imposed on him by the district court 1 after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). On appeal, counsel moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), filing a brief in which she argued that the court erred by not granting a more substantial downward departure.

We conclude Mr. Vasquez-Rodriguez’s sentence is unreviewable. See United States v. Arps, 197 F.3d 1202, 1203 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (challenge to extent of downward departure is unreviewable); United States v. Nguyen, 46 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir.1995) (defendant who explicitly and voluntarily exposes himself to specific sentence may not challenge that punishment on appeal); United States v. Dutches 8 F.3d 11, 12 (8th Cir.1993) (extent of downward departure is unreviewable, regardless of court’s reasons for retraining from departing further).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and we affirm.

1

. The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Gerardo Vasquez-Rodriguez, a Mexican citizen, appeals the sentence of 66 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release imposed on him by the district court 1 after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). On appeal, counsel moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), filing a brief in which she argued that the court erred by not granting a more substantial downward departure.

We conclude Mr. Vasquez-Rodriguez’s sentence is unreviewable. See United States v. Arps, 197 F.3d 1202, 1203 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (challenge to extent of downward departure is unreviewable); United States v. Nguyen, 46 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir.1995) (defendant who explicitly and voluntarily exposes himself to specific sentence may not challenge that punishment on appeal); United States v. Dutches 8 F.3d 11, 12 (8th Cir.1993) (extent of downward departure is unreviewable, regardless of court’s reasons for retraining from departing further).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and we affirm.

1

. The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 F. App'x 658, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-g-vasquez-rodriguez-ca8-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack