Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03514/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03514-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joshua James Roberts
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3514

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

Joshua James Roberts, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 28, 2010

Filed: June 2, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Joshua Roberts was charged with conspiring to manufacture 5 grams or more

of actual (pure) methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)

and 846. He pleaded guilty in accord with a written plea agreement, which contained

an appeal waiver. The district court1

 sentenced Roberts to 262 months in prison, the

bottom of the advisory Guidelines range. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief under

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and seeks to withdraw. 

Appellate Case: 09-3514 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/02/2010 Entry ID: 3670180
-2-

We will enforce the appeal waiver in this case because Roberts’s appeal falls

within the scope of the waiver, the record shows the requisite knowledge and

voluntariness, and enforcing the appeal waiver would not constitute a miscarriage of

justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc)

(court should enforce appeal waiver and dismiss appeal where appeal falls within

scope of waiver, both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and

voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result); see also United States v.

Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal

waiver in Anders case). 

Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issue not covered by the waiver.

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we dismiss this appeal. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-3514 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/02/2010 Entry ID: 3670180