Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-03326/USCOURTS-ca8-07-03326-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jose Tomas Cuautle-Robles
Appellant
United States
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-3326

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Jose Tomas Cuautle-Robles, * Western District of Missouri.

*

Appellant. * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________

Submitted: February 21, 2008

 Filed: February 25, 2008

___________

Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jose Tomas Cuautle-Robles appeals the 15-month prison sentence the district

court1

 imposed after he pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the transportation of

illegal aliens within the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii),

(A)(v)(II), and (B)(ii). His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). For the following reasons, we affirm.

Appellate Case: 07-3326 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/25/2008 Entry ID: 3405791
-2-

First, the district court did not clearly err in denying Cuautle-Robles’s request

for a mitigating-role reduction because he failed to prove he played a minimal or

minor role in the offense; instead, he admitted to knowingly aiding others in

transporting illegal aliens and keeping track of payments for the trip. See United

States v. Godinez, 474 F.3d 1039, 1042 (8th Cir. 2007) (standard of review; defendant

bears burden to prove he played minor role).

Second, we conclude that Cuautle-Robles’s within-Guidelines-range sentence

is not unreasonable: nothing in the record indicates the district court overlooked a

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

judgment in weighing appropriate factors. See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456,

2462-68 (2007); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1003-04 (8th Cir. 2005).

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: 07-3326 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/25/2008 Entry ID: 3405791