Opinion
24-2321
12-13-2024
United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Marcus Medina Defendant-Appellant
Unpublished
Submitted: December 10, 2024
Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville
Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Marcus Medina appeals the within-Guidelines sentence the district courtimposed after he pled guilty to intentionally distributing methamphetamine. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
Counsel moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the application of an enhancement for maintaining a premises for distributing drugs and the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. Upon careful review, this court concludes that the district court did not clearly err in applying the premises enhancement. See United States v. Miller, 698 F.3d 699, 705, 707 (8th Cir. 2012) (clear error review; premises enhancement applied where premises was also defendant's family home); United States v. Valdez, No. 21-3727, 2023 WL 3772682 (8th Cir. June 2, 2023) (unpublished per curiam) (premises enhancement applied where defendant used shop building at his personal residence to sell methamphetamine to informant in 2 controlled purchases and had directed informant to come to his shop for the sale). This court also concludes that the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence, as it properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors; there is no indication that it overlooked a relevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors; and the sentence was within the advisory Guidelines range. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (abuse of discretion review); United States v. Anderson, 90 F.4th 1226, 1227 (8th Cir. 2024) (district court has wide latitude in weighing relevant factors); United States v. Miner, 544 F.3d 930, 932 (8th Cir. 2008) (appellate court may presume sentence within properly calculated guidelines range is reasonable).
Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), this court finds no non-frivolous issues for appeal.
The judgment is affirmed and counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.