United States v. Jose Reyes-Sandoval

54 F. App'x 631
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 17, 2003
Docket02-2472
StatusUnpublished

This text of 54 F. App'x 631 (United States v. Jose Reyes-Sandoval) 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 Reyes-Sandoval, 54 F. App'x 631 (8th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jose Luis Reyes-Sandoval (Reyes) pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a substance containing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1). After granting the government’s downward-departure motion made under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, p.s., the district court 1 sentenced Reyes to the statutory minimum of 120 months imprisonment, to be followed by 5 years supervised release. On appeal, Reyes’s newly appointed counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that Reyes’s original attorney suggested he would receive only a 5-year sentence.

Construing counsel’s argument as a challenge to the voluntariness of Reyes’s guilty plea, we note that the district court warned Reyes, at his guilty plea hearing, that he faced a 120-month mandatory-minimum sentence, and Reyes acknowledged that the court would decide his sentence, and that he could not withdraw his plea if he received a higher-than-expected sentence, see United States v. Granados, 168 F.3d 343, 345 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam); further, the court was not permitted to depart below the mandatory-minimum sentence absent a government motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), see United States v. Baker, 64 F.3d 439, 441 (8th Cir.1995). Finally, any ineffective-assistance claim is not properly before us. See United States v. Cain, 134 F.3d 1345,1352 (8th Cir.1998).

Having carefully reviewed the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Thus, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

1

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

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. Scott Baker
64 F.3d 439 (Eighth Circuit, 1995)
United States v. Francisco Granados
168 F.3d 343 (Eighth Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 F. App'x 631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jose-reyes-sandoval-ca8-2003.