Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03330/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03330-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jimmy Joe Korf
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3330

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Jimmy Joe Korf, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 24, 2010

Filed: May 26, 2010

___________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jimmy Korf was charged with distributing and possessing with intent to

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

Korf pleaded guilty in accord with a written plea agreement, which contained an

appeal waiver. Departing downward, the district court1

 sentenced Korf to 140 months

in prison, well below the advisory Guidelines range. On appeal, counsel has moved

to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

challenging the reasonableness of the sentence.

Appellate Case: 09-3330 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/26/2010 Entry ID: 3668284
-2-

We will enforce the appeal waiver in this case because Korf’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: 09-3330 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/26/2010 Entry ID: 3668284