United States v. Jorge Tiazan-Santiago

486 F. App'x 618
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 4, 2012
Docket12-1973
StatusUnpublished

This text of 486 F. App'x 618 (United States v. Jorge Tiazan-Santiago) 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. Jorge Tiazan-Santiago, 486 F. App'x 618 (8th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jorge Tiazan-Santiago pleaded guilty to unlawfully entering the United States after having been twice deported, and following a conviction for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). The district court 1 sentenced him to 24 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. Counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), he argues that the sentence is unreasonable, because 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) prohibits sentences greater than necessary to sufficiently comply with the purposes of the statutory sentencing factors.

After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the 24-month sentence, which falls at the very bottom of the uncontested advisory Guidelines range: we give the sentence a presumption of reasonableness, and counsel suggests nothing to rebut the presumption. See United States v. Franik, 687 F.3d 988, (8th Cir.2012); United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc). Further, having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivo-lous issues.

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

1

. The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

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. Todd Richard Franik
687 F.3d 988 (Eighth Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Feemster
572 F.3d 455 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
486 F. App'x 618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jorge-tiazan-santiago-ca8-2012.