UNITED STATES v. WEAVER (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.2021-03-23No. No. 20-2645

Summary · law.co

Holding. The appeal is dismissed and counsel's request to withdraw is granted because the appeal waiver was valid and enforceable.

Kristi Weaver pleaded guilty to methamphetamine conspiracy and firearm possession in furtherance of drug trafficking. She received a total sentence of 181 months—121 months on the drug charge and 60 months on the firearm charge—neither of which exceeded the applicable statutory maximum. As part of her plea agreement, Weaver waived her right to appeal except in cases where her sentence would exceed statutory limits.

Weaver's appellate counsel filed an Anders brief requesting permission to withdraw. The court examined whether Weaver's appeal waiver was valid and enforceable. The court determined that the waiver satisfied all requirements: it applied to Weaver's appeal, she entered into the plea agreement and waiver knowingly and voluntarily, and enforcing the waiver would not cause a miscarriage of justice. The court also independently reviewed the record and found no other non-frivolous appellable issues.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Enforceability of appeal waivers in plea agreements
Whether sentencing within statutory limits falls within scope of appeal waiver
Standards for independent review in Anders proceedings

Procedural posture

Weaver appealed following sentencing on guilty pleas to drug conspiracy and firearms charges, but her counsel filed an Anders brief on behalf of a client bound by an appeal waiver.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

[Unpublished]

Kristi Weaver pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846, and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). As part of her plea agreement, she waived her right to appeal unless, as relevant here, her sentence exceeded the statutory maximum. The district court

imposed a total sentence of 181 months in prison, which included 121 months on the drug count and 60 months on the firearm count. Neither sentence exceeded the statutory maximum. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A); 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). In an Anders brief, Weavers counsel discusses the appeal waiver and the sentence, as well as requests permission to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is both enforceable and applicable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing this issue 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 the scope of the waiver, 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel permission to withdraw.

FOOTNOTES

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

. We continue to remind counsel that “Anders briefing must be done as an advocate” on behalf of the defendant, not the government. Evans v. Clarke, 868 F.2d 267, 268 (8th Cir. 1989) (internal quotation marks omitted); see Robinson v. Black, 812 F.2d 1084, 1086 (8th Cir. 1987).

PER CURIAM.