Court Opinion

ID: 9943411
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-23 16:01:36.960552+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:47:01.584000
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 23-2731
                         ___________________________

                              United States of America

                         lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                            v.

                                    Earl Ganaway

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                       ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                  for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
                                  ____________

                           Submitted: February 20, 2024
                             Filed: February 23, 2024
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before LOKEN, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

       Earl Ganaway appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pled
guilty to drug possession and firearm charges pursuant to a written plea agreement

      1
       The Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri.
containing an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a
brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive
reasonableness of the sentence.

      Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable,
and applicable to the argument raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627
F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo validity and applicability of appeal
waiver); 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 waiver and plea agreement, and enforcing waiver would
not result in miscarriage of justice.) Further, having independently reviewed the
record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for
appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver.

     Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                      ______________________________

                                         -2-