Court Opinion

ID: 9905437
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-29 16:02:31.373696+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:36.249325
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 23-2456
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                             Joshua George Powell, Sr.

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                       ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                       for the Southern District of Iowa
                                ____________

                          Submitted: November 7, 2023
                           Filed: November 29, 2023
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before ERICKSON, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

       Joshua Powell appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled
guilty to a drug offense. The plea came pursuant to a plea agreement in which Powell

      1
      The Honorable Stephen H. Locher, United States District Judge for the
Southern District of Iowa.
waived his right to an appeal. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and filed
a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive
reasonableness of the sentence.

      Upon careful review, we conclude the appeal is valid, enforceable, and
applicable to the issue raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702,
704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing validity and applicability of appeal waiver de novo);
United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (enforcing
appeal waiver if appeal falls within scope of waiver, defendant knowingly and
voluntarily entered into plea agreement and waiver, and it would not result in
miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record under
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for
appeal falling outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss the
appeal based on the appeal waiver and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                        ______________________________

                                          -2-