United States v. Marvin Rivera Fuentes

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Marvin Rivera Fuentes

667 F. App'x 597

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJuly 29, 2016

Docket16-1386

StatusUnpublished

This text of 667 F. App'x 597 (United States v. Marvin Rivera Fuentes) 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. Marvin Rivera Fuentes, 667 F. App'x 597 (8th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Marvin Donal Rivera Fuentes, a citizen of Honduras, pleaded guilty to a charge of illegally reentering the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(1), and the district court 1 sentenced him to 24 months in prison—representing a three-month upward variance from the top of the calculated advisory Guidelines range—to be followed by three years of supervised release. Rivera Fuentes’s counsel moves for leave 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 challenges the reasonableness of the prison sentence,

Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the 24-month sentence. See United States v. Allison, 814 F.3d 952, 953 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review). During the course of the sentencing hearing, the district court heard, and commented on, Rivera Fuentes’s arguments for sentencing leniency. Ultimately however, the court was persuaded, and explained in detail that a three-month upward variance was appropriate because of Rivera Fuentes’s history of drinking alcohol, driving while intoxicated, and driving while barred from doing so, which had resulted in multiple convictions, including one for involuntary manslaughter. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (court, in determining particular sentence to be imposed, shall consider, inter alia, history and characteristics of defendant, and need to protect public from further crimes of defendant); United States v. Mangum, 625 F.3d 466, 470 (8th Cir. 2010) (upward variance is reasonable where court makes individualized assessment of § 3553(a) factors based on facts presented, and considers defendant’s proffered information).

We also conclude, upon review of the record as required by Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), that there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

The judgment is affirmed, and counsel is granted leave to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

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

PER CURIAM.

Marvin Donal Rivera Fuentes, a citizen of Honduras, pleaded guilty to a charge of illegally reentering the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(1), and the district court 1 sentenced him to 24 months in prison—representing a three-month upward variance from the top of the calculated advisory Guidelines range—to be followed by three years of supervised release. Rivera Fuentes’s counsel moves for leave 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 challenges the reasonableness of the prison sentence,

Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the 24-month sentence. See United States v. Allison, 814 F.3d 952, 953 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review). During the course of the sentencing hearing, the district court heard, and commented on, Rivera Fuentes’s arguments for sentencing leniency. Ultimately however, the court was persuaded, and explained in detail that a three-month upward variance was appropriate because of Rivera Fuentes’s history of drinking alcohol, driving while intoxicated, and driving while barred from doing so, which had resulted in multiple convictions, including one for involuntary manslaughter. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (court, in determining particular sentence to be imposed, shall consider, inter alia, history and characteristics of defendant, and need to protect public from further crimes of defendant); United States v. Mangum, 625 F.3d 466, 470 (8th Cir. 2010) (upward variance is reasonable where court makes individualized assessment of § 3553(a) factors based on facts presented, and considers defendant’s proffered information).

We also conclude, upon review of the record as required by Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), that there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

The judgment is affirmed, and counsel is granted leave to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

667 F. App'x 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-marvin-rivera-fuentes-ca8-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack