United States v. Maria Carrillo-Varelas, No. 18-3209 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Kelly, Bowman and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The district court did not err in applying enhancements for maintaining a drug premises and for possessing a dangerous weapon during a drug-trafficking offense.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3209 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Maria Esther Carrillo-Varelas lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville ____________ Submitted: June 27, 2019 Filed: July 1, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before KELLY, BOWMAN, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Maria Esther Carrillo-Varelas directly appeals after she pled guilty to a drugtrafficking offense, and the district court1 sentenced her to a prison term below the 1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. calculated United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”) range. Her counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the district court’s application of two Guidelines enhancements, one for maintaining a premises for the purpose of distributing a controlled substance, and the other for possessing a dangerous weapon during a drug-trafficking offense. After careful review of the record, we conclude that the enhancements were properly applied, as they were not based on clearly erroneous findings. See United States v. Miller, 698 F.3d 699, 705 (8th Cir. 2012) (noting whether the defendant maintained a premises for the purpose of distributing a controlled substance is a factual finding reviewed for clear error); United States v. Atkins, 250 F.3d 1203, 1213 (8th Cir. 2001) (noting whether the defendant possessed a firearm during a drug-trafficking offense is a factual finding reviewed for clear error). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, 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.
