United States v. Aaron Castro , 328 F. App'x 343 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 07-3815
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                  *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                * District Court for the
    * Southern District of Iowa.
    Aaron Michael Castro,                   *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 27, 2009
    Filed: June 2, 2009
    ___________
    Before RILEY, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Aaron Michael Castro pleaded guilty to possessing marijuana with intent to
    distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(D) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Count
    1); possessing a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
    §§ 924(c)(1)(A) and 2 (Count 2); and possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial
    number, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(k) and 2 (Count 3). The district court1
    imposed concurrent prison terms of 43 months on Counts 1 and 3, a consecutive
    prison term of 60 months on Count 2, and concurrent supervised release terms of 2
    1
    The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States District Judge for the Southern
    District of Iowa.
    years on all counts. On appeal, Castro’s 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.
    We conclude that the sentence, which was within the advisory Guidelines range,
    is not unreasonable. See Rita v. United States, 
    551 U.S. 338
    , 341 (2007); United
    States v. Lincoln, 
    413 F.3d 716
    , 717-18 (8th Cir. 2005). The district court considered
    relevant factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and nothing in the record suggests that the
    court misapplied those factors. See United States v. Haack, 
    403 F.3d 997
    , 1004 (8th
    Cir. 2005).
    Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    ,
    80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
    judgment, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
    ______________________________
    -2-