United States v. Victor Alvaro-Reyes

163 F. App'x 449
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 2, 2006
Docket05-1032
StatusUnpublished

This text of 163 F. App'x 449 (United States v. Victor Alvaro-Reyes) 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. Victor Alvaro-Reyes, 163 F. App'x 449 (8th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Victor Avaro-Reyes appeals the 87-month sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug conspiracy, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. In a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel argues that Avaro-Reyes’s sentence is excessive and unreasonable.

To the extent counsel is raising an Eighth Amendment challenge to AvaroReyes’s sentence, we conclude that the argument fails. See United States v. Collins, 340 F.3d 672, 679 (8th Cir.2003) (Eighth Amendment forbids only extreme sentences that are grossly disproportionate to crime); cf. id. at 676, 679-80 (imposition of mandatory life sentence for conspiring to distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine was not cruel and unusual punishment under Eighth Amendment); United States v. Jones, 2 F.3d 827, 828-29 (8th Cir.1993) (finding 151-month sentence for conspiring to distribute phencyclidine not “excessive”).

We further find that Avaro-Reyes’s sentence — which was imposed at the bottom of the Guidelines range, and well below the mandatory statutory minimum — is not unreasonable. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 765-67, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) (appellate courts should review post-Booker sentences for unreasonableness); United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.) (sentence within Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable, and de *450 fendant must rebut presumption of reasonableness), cer t. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 840, — L.Ed.2d - (2005).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Warren K. Urbom, 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. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Rodney K. Jones
2 F.3d 827 (Eighth Circuit, 1993)
United States v. Jeffrey H. Collins
340 F.3d 672 (Eighth Circuit, 2003)
United States v. Richard Lincoln
413 F.3d 716 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 F. App'x 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-victor-alvaro-reyes-ca8-2006.