United States v. Juan Sanchez-Sanchez , 451 F. App'x 614 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 11-2793
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                  *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                * District Court for the
    * Western District of Arkansas.
    Juan Sanchez-Sanchez,                   *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: February 7, 2012
    Filed: February 9, 2012
    ___________
    Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Juan Sanchez-Sanchez directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug-conspiracy
    offense, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1) and 846, and the district court1
    imposed a within-Guidelines-range sentence. His counsel has moved to withdraw,
    and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), asserting that
    Sanchez-Sanchez’s plea was not knowing and voluntary. We conclude that any
    challenge to the voluntariness of Sanchez-Sanchez’s guilty plea is not cognizable on
    direct appeal, because he did not move to withdraw his plea in the district court. See
    1
    The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court
    for the Western District of Arkansas.
    United States v. Villareal-Amarillas, 
    454 F.3d 925
    , 932 (8th Cir. 2006) (claim that
    guilty plea was not knowing and intelligent was not cognizable on direct appeal
    where defendant did not attempt to withdraw guilty plea in district court); see also
    United States v. Umanzor, 
    617 F.3d 1053
    , 1060 (8th Cir. 2010) (where defendant did
    not move to withdraw guilty plea in district court, any claim that plea was
    constitutionally flawed would need to be addressed through 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
    proceedings).
    Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s
    motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-2793

Citation Numbers: 451 F. App'x 614

Judges: Melloy, Per Curiam, Smith, Wollman

Filed Date: 2/9/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023