Court Opinion

ID: 9942551
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-21 16:01:58.831853+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:48:14.083205
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 23-3489
                         ___________________________

                             United States of America

                                       Plaintiff - Appellee

                                         v.

                                James E. Horne, Jr.

                                    Defendant - Appellant
                                  ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
                                 ____________

                          Submitted: February 15, 2024
                            Filed: February 21, 2024
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before SHEPHERD, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

       James Horne, Jr. received a 180-month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty
to carjacking, see 18 U.S.C. § 2119(2); discharging a firearm during a crime of
violence, see id. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii); and possessing a firearm as a felon, see id.
§ 922(g)(1). An Anders brief suggests that the district court 1 abused its discretion
by overruling his objections and imposing a substantively unreasonable sentence.
See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

       Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver in his plea agreement
covers these issues. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010)
(reviewing the validity of an appeal waiver de novo); United States v. Andis, 333
F.3d 886, 889–92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (explaining that an appeal waiver will
be enforced if the appeal falls within its scope, the defendant knowingly and
voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver, and enforcing the waiver
would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed
the record and conclude that no other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 82–83 (1988). We accordingly dismiss the appeal and grant counsel
permission to withdraw.
                        ______________________________

      1
      The Honorable David Gregory Kays, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.
                                  -2-