Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-03255/USCOURTS-ca8-06-03255-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Manuel Peinado-Juarez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-3255

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the 

* District of Nebraska.

Manuel Peinado-Juarez, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 4, 2007

Filed: October 12, 2007

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Manuel Peinado-Juarez (Peinado-Juarez) appeals the 37-month prison sentence

the district court1

 imposed after he pled guilty to reentering the United States illegally

after having been deported following an aggravated felony conviction, in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). In a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967), his counsel argues (1) Peinado-Juarez’s sentence was improperly

calculated under the Guidelines, and (2) the sentence is too harsh. In a pro se

supplemental brief, Peinado-Juarez argues the court improperly relied on his prior

Appellate Case: 06-3255 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/12/2007 Entry ID: 3361328
-2-

state drug sentence in determining his offense level and criminal history category

because the sentence was imposed more than 15 years before his involvement in the

instant offense.

We enforce the broad appeal waiver included in Peinado-Juarez’s plea

agreement: the plea colloquy reflects that Peinado-Juarez understood and voluntarily

accepted the terms of the plea agreement, including the waiver; this appeal falls within

the scope of the waiver; and no injustice would result. See United States v. Andis,

333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (discussing enforceability of appeal

waiver); see also United States v. Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir.

2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75, 80 (1988), for any nonfrivolous issue not covered by the waiver, we find

none. Accordingly, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. We also grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-3255 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/12/2007 Entry ID: 3361328