Case ID: f-appx_507/html/0615-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Clemente MELCHOR-RUEDA, also known as Francisco Ferniza-Rueda, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-3390.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 17, 2013.
    Filed: May 29, 2013.
    Kyle Evan Waters, Mark W. Webb, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Bruce Eddy, Assistant, Angela Lorene Pitts, Assistant, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fayetteville, AR, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Jose Clemente Melchor-Rueda, Ray-mondville, TX, pro se.
    Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Jose Melchor-Rueda directly appeals the within-Guidelines-range sentence the district court imposed after he pled guilty to an illegal re-entry offense, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable.

Upon careful review, this court concludes that the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 460-62 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc) (describing appellate review of sentencing decisions). Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), this court finds no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment' of the district court is affirmed. 
      
      . The Honorable Jimm Lárry Hendren, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.