United States v. Ana Vaca-Gomez, No. 12-3926 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Claim of ineffective assistance of counsel would not be considered on direct appeal; sentence was not excessive or unfair; there was no basis in the record to conclude that the lack of a substantial-assistance departure motion is a basis to challenge the sentence imposed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-3926 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Ana Vaca-Gomez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville ____________ Submitted: September 30, 2013 Filed: October 7, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BYE, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Ana Vaca-Gomez pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the distribution of actual methamphetamine, and the district court1 sentenced her to 87 months in prison and 4 1 The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. years of supervised release. On appeal, her counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), counsel raises as issues (1) whether the sentence is excessive and unfair, and (2) whether Vaca-Gomez s proffer interviews with the government should have resulted in a motion for a downward departure based on substantial assistance. In his motion to withdraw, counsel states that Vaca-Gomez believes that counsel rendered ineffective assistance. To the extent Vaca-Gomez raises a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to consider it in this direct criminal appeal. See United States v. McAdory, 501 F.3d 868, 872-73 (8th Cir. 2007). We also reject the argument that the district court s sentence was excessive and unfair, see United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc), and we find no basis in the record to conclude that the lack of a substantial-assistance departure motion in this case is a basis to challenge the sentence imposed, see United States v. Wolf, 270 F.3d 1188, 1190 (8th Cir. 2001). Last, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel s motion to withdraw. ______________________________ -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.
