Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-14-01883/USCOURTS-ca8-14-01883-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gerald Medrano-Rodriguez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 14-1883

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Gerald Medrano-Rodriguez, also known as Geraldo Medrano-Rodriguez, also

known as Gerald Rodriguez

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

____________

 Submitted: December 29, 2014

Filed: December 31, 2014

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Gerald Medrano-Rodriguez directly appeals following imposition of sentence

by the district court upon his guilty plea to a drug offense. His counsel has moved 1

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

1

the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Appellate Case: 14-1883 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/31/2014 Entry ID: 4230444 
to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

arguing that the court erred in refusing to grant Medrano-Rodriguez an additional

one-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b). 

Medrano-Rodriguez has filed a pro se brief, arguing for the first time on appeal that

the government breached the plea agreement by withholding a section 3E1.1(b)

motion. The government has moved to dismiss based on an appeal waiver in the

written plea agreement.

We deny the government's motion to dismiss, because we have some concern

as to whether the district court drew appellant's attention to the waiver in the manner

contemplated by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(N). See United States

v. Boneshirt, 662 F.3d 509, 516 (8th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 1613 (2012).

Reviewing for plain error, we reject as meritless Medrano-Rodriguez’s pro se

argument that the government breached the plea agreement. See United States v.

Yellow, 627 F.3d 706, 708-09 (8th Cir. 2010). Further, we need not reach the merits

of the argument in counsel’s Anders brief. Medrano-Rodriguez wassubject to a 120-

month statutory minimum sentence, which would have trumped the lower range

resulting from an additional level of reduction for acceptance of responsibility–

producing a Guidelines range of 120-121 months in prison. The district court

sentenced Medrano-Rodriguez to 120 months, the very lowest sentence that the court

could have imposed in the circumstances of this case. See United States v. Chacon,

330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003). Finally, having independently reviewed the

record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 14-1883 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/31/2014 Entry ID: 4230444