Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-01313/USCOURTS-ca8-09-01313-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Israel John Patrick Davis
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the District of North Dakota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-1313

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of North Dakota.

Israel John Patrick Davis, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 28, 2010

Filed: February 3, 2010

___________

Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea agreement, Israel John Patrick Davis pleaded guilty

to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute, and to distribute, 500 grams or more

of a methamphetamine mixture, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and

846. After granting the government’s substantial-assistance motions under U.S.S.G.

§ 5K1.1 and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), the district court1

 sentenced Davis below the

mandatory term of life in prison to 204 months in prison and 5 years of supervised

release. On appeal, his counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

Appellate Case: 09-1313 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/03/2010 Entry ID: 3630783
-2-

738 (1967), and has moved to withdraw. In a pro se supplemental brief, Davis

requests new counsel, and argues that counsel rendered ineffective assistance in the

district court proceedings below and in this appeal. 

Davis entered his guilty plea pursuant to a written plea agreement that contains

(1) a waiver of his right to appeal the district court’s entry of judgment, except for the

right to appeal an upward departure, and (2) a waiver of his right to bring

postconviction proceedings, except for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

We will enforce the appeal waiver in this appeal, because the record shows that Davis

entered his plea voluntarily, with full knowledge of and consent to the appeal waiver.

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

(enforceability of appeal waiver); United States v. Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070,

1071 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case). 

We reject as meritless Davis’s argument that counsel was ineffective in this

appeal, because he cannot demonstrate the requisite prejudice from counsel’s alleged

deficiencies. See United States v. Davis, 508 F.3d 461, 463-64 (8th Cir. 2007)

(defendant did not establish prejudice where counsel tendered Anders brief, because

appellate court reviews record and will order full briefing of any nonfrivolous issues).

Davis’s claim that counsel rendered ineffective assistance during the proceedings

below should be raised (if at all) in proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which Davis

reserved the right to do. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-

27 (8th Cir. 2006). 

Finally, having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues that are not covered by the

appeal waiver. Accordingly, we deny Davis’s request for new appellate counsel; we

grant counsel’s motion to withdraw; and we dismiss this appeal. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-1313 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/03/2010 Entry ID: 3630783