Case ID: f-appx_356/html/0900-01.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, Appellee, v. Ronald HINES, also known as Ronald Hinds, Appellant.
    No. 09-1640.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Dec. 10, 2009.
    Filed: Dec. 15, 2009.
    Ronna A. Holloman-Hughes, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Raymond C. Conrad, Jr., Fed. Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant.
    Jane Pansing Brown, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
    Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Ronald Hines appeals the 60-month prison sentence imposed on him by the district court after he pleaded guilty to theft of mail matter, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and seeks leave to withdraw. For reversal, counsel argues that the district court’s sentence was unreasonable.

We will dismiss this appeal. The written plea agreement in this case contains an appeal waiver, and we conclude that the appeal waiver should be enforced: (1) the transcript of the guilty-plea hearing shows that Hines entered his plea knowingly, voluntarily, and with full knowledge of the appeal waiver; (2) the waiver covers the argument raised on appeal; and (3) enforcing the waiver would not cause a miscarriage of justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc).

Having reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfriv-olous issues for appeal that are not covered by the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw. 
      
      . The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.