United States v. Francisco Hernandez, No. 16-3846 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Bowman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. District court did not err in calculating the amount of drugs attributable to defendant.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-3846 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Francisco Guerrero Hernandez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines ____________ Submitted: July 27, 2017 Filed: August 1, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Francisco Guerrero Hernandez (Guerrero) directly appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute 1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. methamphetamine. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). As to counsel’s arguments, we find no error in the district court’s determination of the drug quantity attributable to Guerrero, and no other issues warranting relief. See United States v. Turner, 781 F.3d 374, 393 (8th Cir. 2015) (this court reviews district court’s application of Guidelines de novo, and its findings of fact for clear error); United States v. Young, 689 F.3d 941, 945 (8th Cir. 2012) (in drug conspiracy case, attributable drug quantity includes quantities attributable directly to defendant as well as quantities attributable to reasonably foreseeable actions of others taken to further conspiracy). In addition, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment. ______________________________ -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.
