Case ID: f-appx_684/html/0590-01.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. Jason Jonathan OLSSON Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-3776
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 26, 2017
    Filed: May 1, 2017
    Abram McGull, II, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Springfield, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Jason Jonathan Olsson, Pro Se
    Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Jason Olsson directly appeals the sentence the district court imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to commit a drug offense, pursuant to a plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver. His 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), questioning the reasonableness of Olsson’s sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable and applicable to the issue raised in this appeal. 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). In addition, 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 M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.