Opinion ID: 619920
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Patten's Sentencing Challenge

Text: Patten next contends his 480-month sentence is excessive and runs afoul of the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. He argues the sentence went far beyond what was necessary to accomplish the sentencing goals. Patten frames his appeal as a challenge to an illegal sentence in light of the plea agreement he entered wherein he waived his appeal rights. To the extent Patten challenges the reasonableness of his sentence, his claim is barred by the appeal waiver contained in the plea agreement. We will enforce a defendant's appeal waiver against all issues that fall within the scope of the waiver if the defendant entered the plea agreement and appeal waiver `knowingly and voluntarily' and enforcement of the waiver would not cause a `miscarriage of justice.' United States v. Boroughf, 649 F.3d 887, 890 (8th Cir.2011) (quoting United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir.2010)). Patten's attack on the reasonableness of his sentence falls within the scope of his appeal waiver, and there is nothing to show the plea agreement and waiver were not entered into knowingly and voluntarily or that a miscarriage of justice would result. Id. While Patten waived his reasonableness challenge, we may still consider his Eighth Amendment argument. This court reviews challenges based on the Eighth Amendment de novo. United States v. Neadeau, 639 F.3d 453, 456 (8th Cir.2011). [T]his Court has never held that a sentence within the statutory range violates the Eighth Amendment. Id. ; see also United States v. Collins, 340 F.3d 672, 679 (8th Cir.2003) (It is well settled that a sentence within the range provided by statute is generally not reviewable by an appellate court.). After careful review, we conclude this is not the rare case in which a threshold comparison of the crime committed and the sentence imposed leads to an inference of gross disproportionality. United States v. Spires, 628 F.3d 1049, 1054 (8th Cir.2011) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We affirm.