Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-03107/USCOURTS-ca8-06-03107-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gabriel Abundiz Nabejar
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of

Minnesota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-3107

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of Minnesota.

*

Gabriel Abundiz Nabejar, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 9, 2007

Filed: December 28, 2007

___________

Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gabriel Abundiz Nabejar appeals the 96-month prison sentence the district

court1

 imposed after he pleaded guilty to re-entering the United States as a previously

deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), subsequent to a conviction for an

aggravated felony in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). In a brief filed under Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Abundiz Nabejar’s counsel seeks permission to

withdraw. 

Appellate Case: 06-3107 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/28/2007 Entry ID: 3386556
-2-

We conclude that Abundiz Nabejar’s advisory Guidelines imprisonment range

was correctly determined by the district court, and that his within-Guidelines sentence

is not unreasonable because nothing in the record suggests the court overlooked a

relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper factor, or made a clear error of

judgment in imposing the sentence. See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462-

68 (2007) (allowing appellate presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines

sentences); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1003-04 (8th Cir. 2005) (factors

used to review sentence for reasonableness). The factors the court considered in

imposing a top-of-the-Guidelines sentence--Nabejar’s serious and significant criminal

history, his failure to register as a sex offender, his use of alias names, and the need

to provide just punishment and afford adequate deterrence--were all proper sentencing

factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1) (history and characteristics of defendant),

(a)(2)(A) (provide just punishment), (a)(2)(B) (afford adequate deterrence). After

reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we

find no nonfrivolous issues. 

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-3107 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/28/2007 Entry ID: 3386556