Case ID: f-appx_701/html/0543-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael P. AYALA Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-4473
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 13, 2017
    Filed: November 16, 2017
    Nhan Due Nguyen, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Springfield, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Michael P. Ayala, Pro Se
    Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Michael Ayala challenges the sentence the district court imposed after he pleaded guilty— pursuant to a written plea agreement that included an appeal waiver — to drug, firearm, and money laundering charges. His counsel has moved to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the sentence was greater than necessary.

We conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable, because our review of the record demonstrates that Ayala entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, see Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997); the argument falls within the scope of the waiver; and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver, see United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 890-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Furthermore, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the waiver.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion, and we dismiss this appeal. 
      
      . The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.