Filed: Apr. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-1012 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jesse Howard Garcia lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul _ Submitted: March 1, 2017 Filed: April 28, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Jesse Garcia directly appeals the district court’s1 judgment entered on a jury verd
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-1012 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jesse Howard Garcia lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul _ Submitted: March 1, 2017 Filed: April 28, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Jesse Garcia directly appeals the district court’s1 judgment entered on a jury verdi..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-1012
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Jesse Howard Garcia
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
____________
Submitted: March 1, 2017
Filed: April 28, 2017
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Jesse Garcia directly appeals the district court’s1 judgment entered on a jury
verdict finding him guilty of conspiring to distribute methamphetamine, and of being
1
The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.
a felon in possession of a firearm. On appeal, Garcia challenges the district court’s
jurisdiction based on his assertion that he is a “private, sovereign, flesh and blood
man.” The government has moved for summary disposition.
We conclude that Garcia’s jurisdictional challenge lacks merit. See United
States v. Hart,
701 F.2d 749, 750 (8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam) (rejecting jurisdictional
challenge based on defendant’s argument that he was sovereign citizen). Accordingly,
we grant the government’s motion, and summarily affirm the district court’s
judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).
______________________________
-2-