United States v. Mario Manuel ( 2023 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 22-3645
___________________________
United States of America,
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,
v.
Mario Marqwinn Manuel,
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Central
____________
Submitted: April 7, 2023
Filed: April 12, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Mario Manuel appeals after the district court1 revoked his probation and
sentenced him to 18 months in prison. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and filed
1
The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for
the Southern District of Iowa.
a brief arguing that the revocation sentence is substantively unreasonable. In a pro
se brief, Manuel argues that counsel was ineffective for advising him to admit to the
violation, and that the district court was biased against him.
We conclude that Manuel’s sentence was not unreasonable, as there is no
indication that the district court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight
to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in
weighing the relevant factors. See United States v. Shepard, 657 F.3d 682, 685 (8th
Cir. 2011); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 922-23 (8th Cir. 2006); United
States v. Tschebaum, 306 F.3d 540, 543-44 (8th Cir. 2002). Manuel’s contention that
counsel provided ineffective assistance is best litigated in a collateral proceeding
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 827
(8th Cir. 2006). His allegation of judicial bias is conclusory and not supported by the
record. See Bannister v. Delo, 100 F.3d 610, 614 (8th Cir. 1996).
Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-