United States v. Jose Luis Reyes-Contreras

349 F.3d 524, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 22844, 2003 WL 22517343
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedNovember 7, 2003
Docket03-1389
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 349 F.3d 524 (United States v. Jose Luis Reyes-Contreras) 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. Jose Luis Reyes-Contreras, 349 F.3d 524, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 22844, 2003 WL 22517343 (8th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea agreement, Jose Luis Reyes-Contreras pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000). He acknowledged that by pleading guilty, he was subjecting himself to a statutory minimum penalty of ten years in prison and five years of supervised release.

At sentencing, the district court 1 imposed the statutory minimum sentence: a ten-year prison term and a five-year term of supervised release. Reyes-Contreras subsequently moved to withdraw his guilty plea, have new counsel appointed, and have a new sentencing hearing conducted. The district court denied his motion. Reyes-Contreras appeals.

Reyes-Contreras cannot challenge his conviction or sentence on appeal because he received precisely what he bargained for in the plea agreement. See United States v. Nguyen, 46 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir.1995). The district court properly denied Reyes-Contreras’s motion to withdraw his plea because it was filed after sentence was imposed. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(e) (2002).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

1

. The Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

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

Related

United States v. Billie Batemon
782 F.3d 1004 (Eighth Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Henderson
559 F. App'x 574 (Seventh Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Robert Dawkins
443 F. App'x 848 (Fourth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Baker
824 F. Supp. 2d 918 (D. North Dakota, 2011)
United States v. Johnny Vega
337 F. App'x 608 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Barnett
426 F. Supp. 2d 898 (N.D. Iowa, 2006)
United States v. Rashawn Chambers
146 F. App'x 75 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Tong Nguyen
144 F. App'x 576 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. John Cogbill
121 F. App'x 173 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
349 F.3d 524, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 22844, 2003 WL 22517343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jose-luis-reyes-contreras-ca8-2003.