United States v. Javier Alvarez, No. 10-3839 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court did not err in finding defendant's statements were admissible on the ground that he was not in custody at the time he made them.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 10-3839 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Javier Garcia Alvarez, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: August 18, 2011 Filed: August 31, 2011 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Javier Garcia Alvarez was charged with transporting illegal aliens within the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii). The charge arose after a van carrying illegal aliens was involved in a crash with another vehicle in Marshall County, Iowa. Garcia Alvarez moved to suppress his post-accident statements to law enforcement officers at the emergency room, because he was not first advised of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The district court1 denied the motion and the matter proceeded to trial. A jury found Garcia Alvarez guilty of the 1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. charge, and the court sentenced him to 40 months in prison, varying upward from the advisory Guidelines range of 27-33 months. On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the court erred in denying the suppression motion and that the sentence is unreasonable. We find no error in the denial of the motion to suppress because we agree with the district court that the evidence at the suppression hearing showed that Garcia Alvarez was not in custody when he made the statements. See United States v. Muhlenbruch, 634 F.3d 987, 995-96 (8th Cir. 2011), petition for cert. filed, No. 10-11208 (U.S. June 22, 2011); United States v. New, 491 F.3d 369, 373-74 (8th Cir. 2007). As to the sentence, we conclude that it is not unreasonable: the court correctly calculated the advisory Guidelines range, properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and all relevant information about Garcia Alvarez, and sufficiently explained the reasons for the sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc); United States v. Watson, 480 F.3d 1175, 1177 (8th Cir. 2007); United States v. Garnette, 474 F.3d 1057, 1060 (8th Cir. 2007). Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (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.
