Case ID: f-appx_709/html/0401-01.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. Donald D. JOHNSON Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-4449
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 24, 2017
    Filed: January 2, 2018
    Nhan Due Nguyen, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Springfield, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Donald D. Johnson, Pro Se
    Before SHEPHERD, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. .
   PER CURIAM.

Donald Johnson directly appeals after pleading guilty in the district court to participating in a drug conspiracy, pursuant to a plea agreement containing 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), arguing that the district court inadequately explained Johnson’s sentence and erred in calculating the Guidelines range.

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, 890-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers). 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 appeal 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.