Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John J. SLOAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-10-18
Citations: 251 F. App'x 362
Docket Number: No. 07-1528
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John J. SLOAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before Hon. FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, Hon. DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge and Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 251
Pages: 362–363

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John J. SLOAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-1528.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 17, 2007.
Decided Oct. 18, 2007.
Michelle L. Jacobs, Office of the United States Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Richard H. Parsons, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Peoria, IL, A. Brian Threlkeld, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Urbana, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before Hon. FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, Hon. DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge and Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
John Sloan pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of crack. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), 846. He had a prior felony drug conviction, so the district court was required to sentence him to a minimum term of 20 years' imprisonment. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii). The court sentenced him to the statutory minimum, which was below the guidelines range. Sloan agreed in a written plea agreement to waive his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, but directed his appointed counsel to file a notice of appeal. Counsel now seeks to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), because he cannot discern a non-frivolous basis for appeal. Sloan has not accepted our invitation to comment on counsel's motion. See Cir. R. 51(b). Because counsel's supporting brief is facially adequate, we limit our review to the potential issues he identifies. See United States v. Schuh, 289 F.3d 968, 973-74 (7th Cir.2002).
Sloan promised in his plea agreement that he would not challenge his conviction or sentence, except on a few limited grounds that are not relevant here. Accordingly, Sloan is bound by the appeal waiver unless he wants his entire plea agreement set aside. See United States v. Whitlow, 287 F.3d 638, 640 (7th Cir.2002); United States v. Hare, 269 F.3d 859, 860 (7th Cir.2001) (explaining that a "waiver of appeal is valid, and must be enforced, unless the agreement in which it is contained is annulled"). Counsel advises that Sloan does not seek this relief, which Sloan does not dispute in a response under Rule 51(b); thus we agree with counsel that any challenge to Sloan's conviction or sentence would be frivolous.
Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.