# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 3- 24 96

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca,
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e ,

v.
Mal la m Tifah , ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Marc h 6 , 20 14 Fi le d: Apri l 1 7, 2 01 4 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, BYE, an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Mal la m Tifa h pl ead ed gu i l ty to m an uf act ur in g an d po ss es si ng wit h in te nt to di st rib ut e m ari

juan a, an d m ai nt ai ni ng a dr ug -in vo lv ed p r e mise s, in vi ol at io n of 21U.S.C. §§ 84 1( a)(1 ), (b )(1 )(C) , a nd 85 6( a)(1 ). Th e d i s t r i ct co ur t se nt en ced hi m to 1 17 m on th s in pr is on

. In th is di rect ap pe al , hi s co un se l ha s m ov ed to wit hd raw an d ha s fil ed a br ie f un de r And ers v. Cal ifo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 73 8 (1 96 7) , in whi ch co un se l arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in it s of fen s e l e v e l c a l c ul at io n. Tifa h ha s fil ed a pr o se
s u p pl em en ta l br ie f, in whi ch he arg ue s th at th e se nt en ce was su bs ta nt i v e l y
un reas on ab le , hi s co un se l was in e f f e c t i v e , an d th is co ur t sh ou ld st rik e th e And ers br ie f. Tifah ha s al so fil ed a pr o s e m ot io n re qu es ti ng reco rd s.

Tifa h’s pl ea ag reem en t co nt ai ns an ap pe al waiv er, whi ch we ho ld is va li d an d whi ch we wil l en fo rce. See Uni te d St at es v. Azu re, 57 1 F.3 d 76 9, 77 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). Tifa h’s chal le ng e to hi s s en te nc e fal ls wit hi n th e sc op e of th e ap pe al waiv er; th e reco rd refl ect s th at he kn owi ng ly an d vo lu nt ari ly en te red in to th e waiv er an d th e pl e a a g reem en t; an d en fo rci ng th e waiv er do es no t res ul t in a
m is carr ia ge of

jus ti ce, as Tifa h’s 17 -m on th se nt en ce is w it hi n th e st at ut or y se nt en ci ng
ran ge s for hi s o ffen se s. See Uni te d S ta te s v . And is , 33 3 F .3d 88 6, 8 89 -9 2 (8t h Cir. 20 03 ) (en ba nc ); se e al so 21 U.S.C. §§ 84 1( b) (1 )(C) , 85 6( b)

. W e de cl in e to co ns id er Tifa h’s in effe ct iv e-as si st an c e cl ai m s in th is di rect ap pe al

. See Uni te d St at es v. Hub ba r d, 63 8 F.3 d 86 6, 86 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ); Uni te d St at es v. Um an zo r, 61 7 F.3 d 10 53 , 10 60 (8t h C ir. 2 01 0)

.

Hav in g rev ie wed th e reco rd in de pe nd en tl y un de r Pen so n v. Ohi o, 48 8 U.S. 75 , 80 (1 98 8) , we fin d no no nf riv ol ou s is su es fo r ap pe al ou ts id e th e sc op e of th e ap pe al waiv er. Acco rd in gl y , th e ap pe al is di sm is se d, Tifa h’s pe nd in g m ot io n is de ni ed , an d

co un se l’s m ot io n t o wi th dr aw is gra nt ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le E. Ri ch ard W eb be r, Uni te d S t a te s Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 East ern Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.
-2

-