Filed: Apr. 08, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-3036 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Daniel Rangel-Mavie, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: April 5, 2002 Filed: April 8, 2002 _ Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and BYE, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Daniel Rangel-Mavie appeals the sentence of 135 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release imposed on him by the Distric
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-3036 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Daniel Rangel-Mavie, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: April 5, 2002 Filed: April 8, 2002 _ Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and BYE, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Daniel Rangel-Mavie appeals the sentence of 135 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release imposed on him by the District..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 01-3036
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Nebraska.
Daniel Rangel-Mavie, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: April 5, 2002
Filed: April 8, 2002
___________
Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Daniel Rangel-Mavie appeals the sentence of 135 months of imprisonment and
five years of supervised release imposed on him by the District Court1 after he
pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute in
excess of 500 grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of
methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994). Although Rangel-Mavie
did not object to anything in the presentence report and received a sentence at the
very bottom of the applicable Guidelines range, he argues that the District Court
1
The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Judge for
the District of Nebraska.
“erred in not imposing a lesser sentence.” There is no jurisdictional basis for
reviewing a sentence merely because an appellant believes it is too harsh. See 18
U.S.C. § 3742(a)(1)-(4) (2000) (limiting appeals to sentences imposed in violation
of law, sentences imposed due to incorrect application of Guidelines, sentences above
applicable Guidelines range, and unreasonable sentences imposed for offenses for
which there are no Guidelines).
Accordingly, we affirm.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-