eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
 1998-03

United States v. Miguel Cervantes ( 1998 )


Menu:
 
  •                          United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 97-1387
___________
United States of America,             *
*
Appellee,                  *
* Appeal from the United States
v.                              * District Court for the
* Southern District of Iowa.
Miguel Angel Cervantes, also known    *
as Rocky Cervantes,                   *        [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellant.                 *
___________
Submitted: March 18, 1998
Filed: March 26, 1998
___________
Before LOKEN, MAGILL, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Miguel Angel Cervantes challenges his convictions for conspiring to distribute
marijuana and using a communication facility to distribute marijuana, and the resulting
60-month sentence imposed by the district court.1 Counsel has filed a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California,
    386 U.S. 738 
    (1967), and has moved to withdraw. After
carefully reviewing the record, we conclude that Cervantes&s Speedy Trial Act and
1
The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, United States District Judge for the Southern
District of Iowa.
double jeopardy claims, to the extent they may be raised, are without merit. See United
States v. McFarland,
    116 F.3d 316
    , 318 (8th Cir.) (defendant waived Speedy Trial Act
violation by failing to move for dismissal; seven-month delay between indictment and
trial did not violate Sixth Amendment right to speedy trial), cert. denied,
    118 S. Ct. 394 
    (1997); United States v. Bentley,
    82 F.3d 222
    , 223 (8th Cir. 1996) (defendant&s failure
to raise double jeopardy argument in district court constitutes waiver); United States
v. Basile,
    109 F.3d 1304
    , 1306-07 (8th Cir.) (dual sovereignty doctrine permits both
state and federal governments to punish same individual for same act), cert. denied,
    118 S. Ct. 173
    , and cert. denied,
    118 S. Ct. 189 
    (1997).
We have reviewed the record for any nonfrivolous issues in accordance with
Penson v. Ohio,
    488 U.S. 75
    , 80 (1988), and find none.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed and counsel&s motion
to withdraw is granted.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-