Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-02868/USCOURTS-ca8-07-02868-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jose Beltran-Medina
Appellant
United States
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Warren K. Urbom, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-2868

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of Nebraska.

*

Jose Beltran-Medina, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 30, 2008 

Filed: July 1, 2008

___________

Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jose Beltran-Medina (Beltran) appeals the 120-month sentence the district

court1

 imposed after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with

intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a

detectable amount of methamphetamine, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(b)(1), 846. His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the district court erred in denying

Beltran safety-valve relief.

Appellate Case: 07-2868 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/01/2008 Entry ID: 3448050
-2-

We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in denying safety-valve

relief. In a post-arrest, videotaped interview with authorities, Beltran disclosed only

the most basic facts of his offense and was less than forthcoming as to information he

reasonably could have been expected to know. See United States v. Guerra-Cabrera,

477 F.3d 1021, 1025 (8th Cir. 2007) (defendant must do more than disclose basic facts

of crime, and district court may hold defendant responsible for disclosing identities

and participation of other individuals in offense if defendant could reasonably be

expected to have such information); United States v. Soto, 448 F.3d 993, 995-96 (8th

Cir. 2006) (standard of review; court is entitled to draw reasonable inferences from

evidence when assessing truthfulness of safety valve proffer).

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 the district court’s judgment.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 07-2868 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/01/2008 Entry ID: 3448050