United States v. Jesus Ojeda-Martinez

121 F. App'x 171
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided February 15, 2005·No. 03-3976·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jesus Ojeda-Martinez (Ojeda) appeals the sentence the district court * imposed after Ojeda pleaded guilty to a drug charge. Ojeda’s counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Ojeda has filed a supplemental brief challenging the district court’s denial of safety-valve relief, and arguing amphetamine is improperly scheduled as a controlled substance. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district court did not clearly err in denying Ojeda safety-valve relief. See United States v. Gutierrez-Maldonado, 328 F.3d 1018, 1019 (8th Cir.2003) (per curiam). We also conclude the drugs Ojeda was convicted of distributing provide a proper basis for criminal penalties, as both substances are explicitly referenced in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). Upon our independent review under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

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

*

The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

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

United States v. Jesus Ojeda-Martinez, 121 F. App'x 171 (8th Cir. 2005).

121 F. App'x 171 (United States v. Jesus Ojeda-Martinez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Adolfo Gutierrez-Maldonado
328 F.3d 1018 (Eighth Circuit, 2003)