UNITED STATES v. GONZALEZ PEREZ (2019)

[Unpublished]

Jose Gonzalez-Perez appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense, pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, and the district court ¹ sentenced him within the advisory range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of Gonzalez-Perez’s sentence.

Upon careful de novo review, we conclude the appeal waiver is valid, applicable, and enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo the 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 plea agreement and waiver, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion, and we dismiss this appeal.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Wilhelmina M. Wright, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

PER CURIAM.