Case ID: f-appx_693/html/0478-01.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 KNIGHT Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-3670
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 19, 2017
    Filed: July 24, 2017
    Bruce E. Clark, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Michael Knight, Pro Se
    Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Michael Knight challenges the sentence the district court imposed after he pleaded guilty to drug and gun charges, pursuant to a written plea agreement. 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), raising the reasonableness of the sentence.

We conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable, because our review of the record demonstrates that Knight 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 Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.