Court Opinion

ID: 9929377
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-02 16:03:23.448478+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:20:38.817890
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eighth Circuit
                    ___________________________

                            No. 23-2373
                    ___________________________

                         United States of America

                    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                       v.

                          Kevin Grant McMillan

                   lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                   ____________

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

                        Submitted: January 30, 2024
                          Filed: February 2, 2024
                               [Unpublished]
                              ____________

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.
       Kevin McMillan appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled
guilty to knowingly engaging in a child exploitation enterprise. The plea came
pursuant to a plea agreement in which McMillan 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.
McMillan has also moved for appointment of new counsel.

      Upon careful review, we conclude the appeal waiver 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, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and deny
McMillan’s motions for appointment of new counsel.
                        ______________________________

      1
      The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.

                                          -2-