Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01842/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01842-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Hugo Beltran-Gomez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Richard C. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-1842

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska

Hugo Beltran-Gomez, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 8, 2005

 Filed: September 13, 2005

___________

Before MELLOY, MAGILL, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Hugo Beltran-Gomez (Beltran) guilty of possessing with intent

to distribute 50 grams or more of a mixture containing methamphetamine (Count I),

and with using or carrying a firearm in relation to a drug-trafficking crime, or

possessing a firearm in furtherance of such crime (Count II), in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1), and 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). The district court1

 sentenced

Beltran to 63 months in prison on Count I and 60 months in prison on Count II, to be

served consecutively, followed by concurrent supervised release terms of 5 years. On

Appellate Case: 04-1842 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/13/2005 Entry ID: 1951044
-2-

appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support

the jury verdict.

This court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence in the light most favorable

to the government, resolving evidentiary conflicts in favor of the government, and

accepting all reasonable inferences that support the jury’s verdict. See United States

v. Ramirez, 350 F.3d 780, 783 (8th Cir. 2003). We find the evidence was sufficient

to support Beltran’s convictions. As to the drug-distribution count, the evidence

showed that Beltran possessed a distribution quantity of methamphetamine (totaling

159.02 grams), and Beltran testified that he sometimes got together with friends to

use drugs. See United States v. Tomberlin, 130 F.3d 1218, 1319 (8th Cir. 1997)

(elements of offense); United States v. Armstrong, 253 F.3d 335, 335-36 (8th Cir.

2001) (upholding jury verdict finding defendant guilty of intent to distribute for

incident involving 96.4 grams of methamphetamine); United States v. Baswell, 792

F.2d 755, 760 n.7 (8th Cir. 1986) (distribution under § 841(a)(1) includes not only

sale of controlled substance, but also non-commercial transfer from one person to

another). As to the firearm conviction, a gun was found in the passenger

compartment of the vehicle within approximately six inches of the drugs, and thus

satisfied the “carry” prong of the statute. See United States v. Rhodenizer, 106 F.3d

222, 225 (8th Cir. 1997) (“to transport a firearm in the passenger compartment of a

vehicle loaded with drugs is to carry a firearm within the meaning of . . .

§ 924(c)(1)”).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm. We also

grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1842 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/13/2005 Entry ID: 1951044