Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Derone COLEMAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-07
Citations: 511 F. App'x 587
Docket Number: No. 12-3617
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Derone COLEMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 511
Pages: 587–588

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Derone COLEMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-3617.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: May 31, 2013.
Filed: June 7, 2013.
Travis D. Poindexter, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Raymond C. Conrad, Jr., Fed. Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant.
Brent B. Venneman, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After Derone Coleman pleaded guilty to drug-trafficking and firearm offenses, the district court sentenced him to a total of 106 months in prison. Coleman appeals. In this court, Coleman's counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel argues that the sentence imposed on Coleman is unreasonable, because the district court should have varied downward.
Coleman pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement that contained a waiver of his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. We will enforce the appeal waiver. See United States v. Jennings, 662 F.3d 988, 990 (8th Cir.2011) (discussing appeal waivers), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 2407,182 L.Ed.2d 1043 (2012); United States v. Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case). In sworn plea-hearing testimony, Coleman assured the court that he understood the plea agreement, including the appeal waiver, and that he was pleading guilty voluntarily. See Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir.1997) (defendant's statements made during plea hearing are entitled to strong presumption of verity). Further, this appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, and enforcing the waiver in these circumstances would cause no miscarriage of justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 891-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc).
Finally, having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 846, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
. The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.