UNITED STATES v. FARIAS (2019)

[Unpublished]

John Farias appeals after he pled guilty to a drug conspiracy offense, and the district court ¹ sentenced him to a prison term below the advisory range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”). His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the district court erred in applying an enhancement for Farias’s role in the offense.

We conclude the district court did not clearly err in applying a role enhancement, as the undisputed facts in the presentence report (“PSR”) established Farias was a manager or supervisor of the drug conspiracy. See United States v. Turner, 781 F.3d 374, 393 (8th Cir. 2015) (reviewing district court’s application of the Guidelines de novo, and its findings of fact for clear error); United States v. Menteer, 408 F.3d 445, 446 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (holding failure to object to facts in PSR constitutes admission of those facts).

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

PER CURIAM.