Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-01388/USCOURTS-ca8-09-01388-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael Alan Petzold
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Ralph Erickson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the District of North Dakota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-1388

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of North Dakota.

*

Michael Alan Petzold, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: February 2, 2010

Filed: February 5, 2010

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Michael Petzold challenges the sentence imposed

by the district court1

 after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy, murder, and related

charges. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). 

Petzold pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement that contained a

waiver of his right to appeal his sentence. We will enforce the appeal waiver here.

Appellate Case: 09-1388 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/05/2010 Entry ID: 3631683
-2-

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 it falls within scope of waiver,

both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and voluntarily, and no

miscarriage of justice would result). Petzold’s argument on appeal falls within the

scope of the appeal waiver, the record shows the requisite knowledge and

voluntariness, and we see nothing to suggest that a miscarriage of justice would result

from enforcing the appeal waiver. See United States v. Michelsen, 141 F.3d 867, 871-

72 (8th Cir. 1998) (appeal waiver is enforceable so long as it resulted from knowing

and voluntary decision; examining personal characteristics of defendant and

circumstances surrounding plea agreement when assessing knowledge and

voluntariness of waiver). 

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

U.S. 75 (1988) for any nonfrivolous issues not covered by the waiver, we find none.

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and we dismiss the appeal. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-1388 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/05/2010 Entry ID: 3631683