United States v. John Farias

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-1608

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

John Paul Farias

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________

Submitted: December 17, 2019 Filed: December 20, 2019

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

John Farias appeals after he pled guilty to a drug conspiracy offense, and the district court1 sentenced him to a prison term below the advisory range under the

1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”). His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing the district court erred in applying an enhancement for Farias’s role in the offense.

We conclude the district court did not clearly err in applying a role enhancement, as the undisputed facts in the presentence report (“PSR”) established Farias was a manager or supervisor of the drug conspiracy. See United States v. Turner, 781 F.3d 374, 393 (8th Cir. 2015) (reviewing district court’s application of the Guidelines de novo, and its findings of fact for clear error); United States v. Menteer, 408 F.3d 445, 446 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (holding failure to object to facts in PSR constitutes admission of those facts).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________