United States v. Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedNovember 13, 2018
Docket18-1171
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez (United States v. Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez) 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. Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez, (8th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-1171 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez, also known as Gustavo Hernandez Gutierrez, also known as Gustavo Hernandez-Gutierrez

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport ____________

Submitted: November 5, 2018 Filed: November 13, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez directly appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence, as there was no indication that it overlooked a relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors, see United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review); and the sentence was below the Guidelines range, see United States v. Torres-Ojeda, 829 F.3d 1027, 1030 (8th Cir. 2016). Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion and affirm. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Rebecca Ebinger, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

-2-

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. Ramiro Salazar-Aleman
741 F.3d 878 (Eighth Circuit, 2013)
United States v. Alejandro Manuel Torres-Ojeda
829 F.3d 1027 (Eighth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Gustavo Gutierrez Hernandez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gustavo-gutierrez-hernandez-ca8-2018.