Filed: Apr. 12, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-2582 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jaime Nevarez, also known as Jamie Nevarez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo _ Submitted: April 7, 2016 Filed: April 12, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Jaime Nevarez appeals from the sentence the District Cour
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-2582 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jaime Nevarez, also known as Jamie Nevarez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Fargo _ Submitted: April 7, 2016 Filed: April 12, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Jaime Nevarez appeals from the sentence the District Court..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-2582
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Jaime Nevarez, also known as Jamie Nevarez
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of North Dakota - Fargo
____________
Submitted: April 7, 2016
Filed: April 12, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Jaime Nevarez appeals from the sentence the District Court1 imposed after he
pleaded guilty to a drug offense. His written plea agreement contained an appeal
1
The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the District of North Dakota.
waiver. After consideration of both the brief filed under Anders v. California,
386
U.S. 738 (1967), by Nevarez’s former appointed attorney and the supplemental brief
later filed by a retained attorney, we conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable
as to all issues raised. See United States v. Andis,
333 F.3d 886, 889–92 (8th Cir.)
(en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers), cert. denied,
540 U.S. 997
(2003). In addition, out of an abundance of caution, we independently reviewed the
record, see Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), and we found no non-frivolous
issue for appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.
______________________________
-2-