United States v. Gerald Medrano-Rodriguez, No. 14-1883 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. In light of the fact that defendant received the shortest sentence he could receive - the mandatory minimum - the court need not reach his argument concerning the district court's refusal to grant an additional one-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-1883 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Gerald Medrano-Rodriguez, also known as Geraldo Medrano-Rodriguez, also known as Gerald Rodriguez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: December 29, 2014 Filed: December 31, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Gerald Medrano-Rodriguez directly appeals following imposition of sentence by the district court1 upon his guilty plea to a drug offense. His counsel has moved 1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the court erred in refusing to grant Medrano-Rodriguez an additional one-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b). Medrano-Rodriguez has filed a pro se brief, arguing for the first time on appeal that the government breached the plea agreement by withholding a section 3E1.1(b) motion. The government has moved to dismiss based on an appeal waiver in the written plea agreement. We deny the government's motion to dismiss, because we have some concern as to whether the district court drew appellant's attention to the waiver in the manner contemplated by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(N). See United States v. Boneshirt, 662 F.3d 509, 516 (8th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 1613 (2012). Reviewing for plain error, we reject as meritless Medrano-Rodriguez’s pro se argument that the government breached the plea agreement. See United States v. Yellow, 627 F.3d 706, 708-09 (8th Cir. 2010). Further, we need not reach the merits of the argument in counsel’s Anders brief. Medrano-Rodriguez was subject to a 120month statutory minimum sentence, which would have trumped the lower range resulting from an additional level of reduction for acceptance of responsibility– producing a Guidelines range of 120-121 months in prison. The district court sentenced Medrano-Rodriguez to 120 months, the very lowest sentence that the court could have imposed in the circumstances of this case. See United States v. Chacon, 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003). Finally, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm. ______________________________ -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.
