United States v. Johnny Vega ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 08-1572
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    v.                                 * District of Nebraska.
    *
    Johnny Vega,                             * [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: July 21, 2009
    Filed: July 24, 2009
    ___________
    Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Johnny Vega appeals the 188-month prison sentence the district court1 imposed
    after he pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to a drug-possession charge. His
    counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), arguing that Vega’s sentence, which is at the low end of the
    applicable advisory Guidelines range, is greater than necessary to meet federal
    sentencing goals and is therefore unreasonable.
    1
    The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United Stated District Judge for the District
    of Nebraska.
    We conclude that Vega’s challenge to his sentence is foreclosed because he
    agreed in the plea agreement to a sentence at the low end of the applicable Guidelines
    range. See United States v. Reyes-Contreras, 
    349 F.3d 524
    , 525 (8th Cir. 2003) (per
    curiam) (defendant could not challenge sentence on appeal because he received
    precisely what he bargained for in plea agreement); United States v. Nguyen, 
    46 F.3d 781
    , 783 (8th Cir. 2005) (“A defendant who explicitly and voluntarily exposes himself
    to a specific sentence may not challenge that punishment on appeal”). In any event,
    Vega’s sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Toothman, 
    543 F.3d 967
    ,
    970 (8th Cir. 2008) (within-Guidelines-range sentence is presumptively reasonable
    on appeal); United States v. Haack, 
    403 F.3d 997
    , 1003-04 (8th Cir. 2005) (discussing
    appropriate considerations at sentencing).
    Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm. See 8th
    Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-1572

Judges: Benton, Bowman, Bye, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 7/24/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024