Case ID: f-appx_694/html/0444-02.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. Damian MATA Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-4432
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 24, 2017
    Filed: July 26, 2017
    
      Brett M. Shasky, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of North Dakota, Fargo, ND, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Damian Mata, Pro Se
    Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Damian Mata directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense and the district court imposed a sentence consistent with Mata’s Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, which contained an appeal waiver. Mata’s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of Mata’s sentence.

We conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, applicable, and enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of validity and applicability of appeal waiver); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced if appeal falls within scope of waiver, defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into plea agreement and waiver, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice). We have independently reviewed the record, pursuant to 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 dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw. 
      
      . The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota.