United States v. Luis Garcia, Jr.

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 28, 2021
Docket20-3331
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Luis Garcia, Jr. (United States v. Luis Garcia, Jr.) 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. Luis Garcia, Jr., (8th Cir. 2021).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 20-3331 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Luis Garcia, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Joplin ____________

Submitted: May 17, 2021 Filed: May 28, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Luis Garcia, Jr., appeals after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense and the district court1 imposed an 80-month prison sentence. His counsel has moved for

1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, and relaying that Garcia contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Before sentencing, the parties jointly recommended an 80-month prison term, and defense counsel argued in favor of the recommendation at the sentencing hearing. Because the court imposed the recommended sentence, we conclude Garcia’s reasonableness challenge is foreclosed. See United States v. Thompson, 289 F.3d 524, 526 (8th Cir. 2002) (“On appeal, [defendant] cannot complain that the district court gave him exactly what his lawyer asked.”). Further, we defer any claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for collateral proceedings. See United States v. McAdory, 501 F.3d 868, 872 (8th Cir. 2007) (this court ordinarily defers ineffective- assistance claims to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings).

Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion, and affirm. ______________________________

-2-

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. Michael D. Thompson
289 F.3d 524 (Eighth Circuit, 2002)
United States v. McAdory
501 F.3d 868 (Eighth Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Luis Garcia, Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-luis-garcia-jr-ca8-2021.