Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-15-01934/USCOURTS-ca8-15-01934-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christopher Lindsey
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-1934

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Christopher Lindsey,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul

____________

 Submitted: November 2, 2015

Filed: November 17, 2015 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SMITH, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Christopher Lindsey directly appeals after he pled guilty to fraud and identitytheft offenses, and the district court1

 sentenced him within his calculated Guidelines

1

The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota.

Appellate Case: 15-1934 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/17/2015 Entry ID: 4337162 
range to 180 months in prison. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), acknowledging that Lindsey’s plea agreement

contained an appeal waiver, and arguing that Lindsey’s sentence is unreasonable. 

Counsel has also moved to withdraw. Lindsey has filed a pro se submission arguing

that the appeal waiver is invalid because the district court advised him about his

appeal rights.

We conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, and after careful de novo review,

see United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010), we further conclude that

the appeal waiver is enforceable as to the issue raised by counsel, see United States

v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also Nguyen v. United

States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997). In addition, an independent review of the

record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), reveals no nonfrivolous issues

outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and

counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 15-1934 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/17/2015 Entry ID: 4337162