Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-04016/USCOURTS-ca8-04-04016-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alejandro Rivera
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the

District of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-4016

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska

Alejandro Rivera, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: November 30, 2005

Filed: January 3, 2006

___________

Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Alejandro Rivera appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court1

for the District of Nebraska upon his guilty plea to distributing and possessing with

intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1),

and to a forfeiture count under 21 U.S.C. § 853. The district court sentenced Rivera

to 70 months imprisonment and 5 years supervised release. For reversal Rivera now

argues (though he did not so object below) that the district court erred in viewing the

Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory, which resulted in an unreasonable sentence

Appellate Case: 04-4016 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/03/2006 Entry ID: 1992336
-2-

under United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). For the following reasons, we

affirm the judgment of the district court.

While the district court plainly erred in sentencing Rivera under mandatory

Guidelines, we conclude that the error was not prejudicial because the record does not

establish a reasonable probability that Rivera would have received a more favorable

sentence under an advisory Guidelines scheme. See United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d

543, 550-53 (8th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 266 (2005). We also

conclude that the sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Booker, 125 S.

Ct. at 765-66 (appellate courts now review sentences for unreasonableness; 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) sets forth factors that guide sentencing and in turn will guide appellate

courts in determining whether sentence is reasonable).

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-4016 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/03/2006 Entry ID: 1992336