United States v. Pedro Delatorre, No. 12-3861 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The court had no authority to impose a sentence below the mandatory minimums it imposed on defendant's two offenses, and his argument that the sentence was unreasonable must be rejected. [ May 06, 2013
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-3861 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Pedro Delatorre lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Ft. Dodge ____________ Submitted: April 23, 2013 Filed: May 7, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Pedro Delatorre appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine after having 1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. been convicted of a felony drug offense in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(B) and 851; and to possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). Counsel seeks leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the 180-month sentence is unreasonable because it is longer than necessary to meet the statutory goals of sentencing and the district court failed to make an individualized assessment of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. Delatorre s guilty plea made him subject to statutory minimum sentences of 120 months in prison on the drug count and a consecutive 60 months in prison on the firearm count. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B); 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) and (c)(1)(D)(ii). The court in imposing these minimum consecutive sentences had no authority to impose a sentence below the statutory minimum on either count. United States v. Chacon, 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003). Therefore, counsel s argument fails. See United States v. Gregg, 451 F.3d 930, 937 (8th Cir. 2006) (United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), does not relate to statutorily-imposed sentences ). Upon careful review of the record, we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal, see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988). Accordingly, we grant counsel s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of the district court. ______________________________ -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.
