United States v. Guillermo Villanueva-Garcia

413 F. App'x 934
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMarch 24, 2011
Docket10-2815
StatusUnpublished

This text of 413 F. App'x 934 (United States v. Guillermo Villanueva-Garcia) 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. Guillermo Villanueva-Garcia, 413 F. App'x 934 (8th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Guillermo Villanueva-Garcia (Garcia) pled guilty to a drug offense pursuant to a *935 plea agreement in which he waived all rights to appeal his sentence if the court sentenced him to no more than 60 months in prison, the statutory mandatory minimum. The district court 1 sentenced him to 60 months in prison, and he appeals. Appellate counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging the length of the sentence. After careful review, this court will enforce the appeal waiver. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc) (court should enforce appeal waiver and dismiss appeal where it falls within scope of waiver, both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result). The record shows the requisite knowledge and voluntariness; the appeal waiver applies because Garcia was sentenced to no more than 60 months; and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. See United States v. McIntosh, 492 F.3d 956, 960 (8th Cir.2007) (appeal waiver was knowing and voluntary when it was included in plea agreement, court questioned defendant about his understanding of waiver, and defendant did not argue on appeal that waiver was unknowing or involuntary). An independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), reveals no nonfrivolous issue not covered by the waiver.

Accordingly, this court grants counsel’s motion to withdraw and dismisses this appeal.

1

. The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge, District of Minnesota.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. John Robert Andis
333 F.3d 886 (Eighth Circuit, 2003)
United States v. McIntosh
492 F.3d 956 (Eighth Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
413 F. App'x 934, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-guillermo-villanueva-garcia-ca8-2011.