Case ID: f-appx_93/html/0103-01.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, Appellee, v. Enrique CAHUE-RANGEL, also known as Antonio Diaz-Lopez, Appellant.
    No. 03-3066.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 5, 2004.
    Decided: April 14, 2004.
    Nicholas W. Chase, Fargo, ND, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Enrique Cahue-Rangel, Anthony, TX, pro se.
    John David Thomas Chapman, Chapman Law Firm, Fargo, ND, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Enrique Cahue-Rangel appeals the sentence the district court imposed when he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation following a conviction for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Cahue-Rangel’s counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), contending that, for several reasons, the district court should have granted Cahue-Rangel a downward departure.

We conclude, however, that the district court’s refusal to depart is unreviewable because the court recognized its authority to depart and declined to do so. See United States v. Koons, 300 F.3d 985, 993-94 (8th Cir.2002).

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we deny the government’s motion to dismiss, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm the judgment. 
      
      . The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota.