United States v. Eric Perez, No. 19-1603 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Benton and Stras, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's within-guidelines range was not substantively unreasonable. [ October 15, 2019
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-1603 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Eric Perez lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: October 15, 2019 Filed: October 16, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Eric Perez appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief 1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. The court properly considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and there is no indication that the court considered an improper or irrelevant factor or committed a clear error in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. Salazar-Aleman, 741 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir. 2013) (discussing appellate review of sentencing decisions). Further, the court imposed a sentence within the calculated guidelines imprisonment range. See United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (stating that a within-guidelines-range sentence is presumed reasonable). Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion and 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.
