Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03484/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03484-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Garcia-Bautista
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3484

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Juan Garcia-Bautista, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 11, 2010

Filed: June 25, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Juan Garcia-Bautista challenges the sentence imposed by the district court1

 after

he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw

and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the

sentence is unreasonable under the facts of this case. 

We review the imposition of sentences under a deferential abuse-of-discretion

standard, first ensuring that the district court committed no significant procedural

Appellate Case: 09-3484 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/25/2010 Entry ID: 3678060
-2-

error, and then considering the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. See United

States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). The sentence

imposed was at the bottom of the undisputed advisory Guidelines range, see Rita v.

United States, 551 U.S. 338, 347-50 (2007), and we find no indication that GarciaBautista would be able to rebut the resulting presumption of reasonableness, see

United States v. Cadenas, 445 F.3d 1091, 1094 (8th Cir. 2006). Further, after

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

have found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. 

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. We also grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw, and we deny Garcia-Bautista’s pending motion for appointment of counsel.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-3484 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/25/2010 Entry ID: 3678060