United States v. Joel Ochoa-Gonzalez, No. 12-2992 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The district court did not commit any procedural error and the sentence it imposed was substantively reasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-2992 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Joel Ochoa-Gonzalez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln ____________ Submitted: March 20, 2013 Filed: April 1, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Joel Ochoa-Gonzales directly appeals the 168-month prison sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to a drug charge. His counsel moved to 1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the district court abused its discretion because the sentence was greater than necessary to meet the goals of sentencing. The district court did not abuse its discretion. The record reflects no procedural error, and the sentence which was below the advisory Guidelines range is not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (in reviewing sentences, appellate court first ensures that no significant procedural error occurred, then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under abuse-of-discretion standard); United States v. Elodio-Benitez, 672 F.3d 584, 586 (8th Cir. 2012) ( where a district court has sentenced a defendant below the advisory guidelines range, it is nearly inconceivable that the court abused its discretion in not varying downward still further (quoting United States v. Moore, 581 F.3d 681, 684 (8th Cir. 2009))). After an independent review of the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), this court finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
