Court Opinion

ID: 9903727
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-27 16:01:27.411242+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:05.056364
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 23-2156
                         ___________________________

                              United States of America

                         lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                            v.

              Cristina Kaye Briones, also known as Cristina Briones

                        lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                        ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern
                                   ____________

                           Submitted: November 20, 2023
                             Filed: November 27, 2023
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before LOKEN, ERICKSON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

       Cristina Briones appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after she pled
guilty to drug offenses. Her counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief

      1
       The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for
the Southern District of Iowa.
challenging a portion of the drug weight attributed to her, and arguing that the
sentence is substantively unreasonable.

       Upon careful review, we conclude that Briones waived any challenge to the
drug quantity attributed to her when she conceded in the district court that she was
not objecting to the facts presented in the presentence report and that the Guidelines
calculations were correct, and instead raised arguments on policy grounds. See
United States v. Booker, 576 F.3d 506, 511 (8th Cir. 2009). We also conclude that
the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. See United States v.
Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (standard of review).
The court considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and there is no
indication that it overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper
or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant
factors. See id. at 461-62; United States v. Lazarski, 560 F.3d 731, 733 (8th Cir.
2009). We have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

      Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                     ______________________________

                                         -2-