Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Juan Alavid CORTEZ, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-26
Citations: 88 F. App'x 967
Docket Number: No. 03-1849
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Juan Alavid CORTEZ, Appellant.
Judges: Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 88
Pages: 967–968

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Juan Alavid CORTEZ, Appellant.
No. 03-1849.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 5, 2004.
Decided Feb. 26, 2004.
Lisagaye A. Biersay, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Juan Alavid Cortez, pro se, Fort Worth, TX, Robert D. Miller, Robert D. Miller & Associates, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Juan Alavid Cortez pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute approximately 452 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine, and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute approximately 452 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 846, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. The district court sentenced Cortez to concurrent terms of 87 months imprisonment on each count, plus concurrent terms of 4 years supervised release. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Construing the Anders brief as challenging the district court's denial of requested sentencing reductions, we find no error in Cortez's sentence. First, the district court did not clearly err in denying Cortez a reduction for being a minor participant, as Cortez admitted he acted as a middleman who arranged the drug deal underlying his conviction. See United States v. Thurmon, 278 F.3d 790, 792 (8th Cir.2002) (standard of review). The district court also did not clearly err in denying Cortez a reduction under the safety-valve provision. See U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(6); United States v. Alarcon-Garcia, 327 F.3d 719, 721 (8th Cir.2003) (standard of review; defendant has burden to show entitlement to safety-valve reduction).
Following our independent review of the record, see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
. The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District of Mirniesota.