Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-24-02611/USCOURTS-ca8-24-02611-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ramon Miguel Felix-Navarrete
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 24-2611

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Ramon Miguel Felix-Navarrete, also known as Uriel Figueroa-Naharette, also

known as Miguel Felix-Valenzuela

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

 ____________

Submitted: December 13, 2024

Filed: December 18, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SMITH, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 24-2611 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/18/2024 Entry ID: 5467557
Ramon Felix-Navarrete appeals the below-Guidelines sentence the district

court1 imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and commit

money laundering pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver. His

counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the

sentence and the voluntariness of the appeal waiver.

We conclude that the plea agreement and the appeal waiver were entered

knowingly and voluntarily. See United States v. Smith, 422 F.3d 715, 724 (8th Cir.

2005) (standard of review); Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir.

1997) (defendant’s statements during plea hearing carry strong presumption of

verity). We further conclude that the appeal waiver is applicable to the issues raised

in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard

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

(appeal waiver will be enforced if appeal falls within scope of waiver, defendant

knowingly and voluntarily entered into plea agreement and waiver, and enforcing

waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice). To the extent that Felix-Navarrete

has attempted to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to

consider it on direct appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824,

826-27 (8th Cir. 2006) (ineffective-assistance claims are usually best raised in

collateral proceedings).

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

U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the

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

withdraw.

______________________________

1The Honorable Beth Phillips, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the

Western District of Missouri.

-2-

Appellate Case: 24-2611 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/18/2024 Entry ID: 5467557