United States v. G. Vasquez-Rodriguez , 11 F. App'x 658 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 00-2805
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                   *
    *
    v.                                * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the District
    Gerardo Vasquez-Rodriguez, also         * of Minnesota.
    known as Raul Gonzales Munoz,           *
    also known as Jose R. Gerero, also      *         [UNPUBLISHED]
    known as Raul Acosta-Munoz,             *
    *
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: April 6, 2001
    Filed: April 12, 2001
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Gerardo Vasquez-Rodriguez, a Mexican citizen, appeals the sentence of
    66 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release imposed on him by the district
    court1 after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of
    1
    The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the
    District of Minnesota.
    
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
    (b)(2). On appeal, counsel moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), filing a brief in which she argued that the court erred
    by not granting a more substantial downward departure.
    We conclude Mr. Vasquez-Rodriguez’s sentence is unreviewable. See United
    States v. Arps, 
    197 F.3d 1202
    , 1203 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (challenge to extent
    of downward departure is unreviewable); United States v. Nguyen, 
    46 F.3d 781
    , 783
    (8th Cir. 1995) (defendant who explicitly and voluntarily exposes himself to specific
    sentence may not challenge that punishment on appeal); United States v. Dutcher,
    
    8 F.3d 11
    , 12 (8th Cir. 1993) (extent of downward departure is unreviewable,
    regardless of court’s reasons for refraining from departing further).
    Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
     (1988), we have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.
    Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 00-2805

Citation Numbers: 11 F. App'x 658

Judges: Loken, Hansen, Arnold

Filed Date: 4/12/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024