Filed: Mar. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-3600 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Charles L. Brown, also known as Bear lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: March 23, 2016 Filed: March 28, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Charles L. Brown directly appeals the sentence impos
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-3600 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Charles L. Brown, also known as Bear lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: March 23, 2016 Filed: March 28, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Charles L. Brown directly appeals the sentence impose..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-3600
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Charles L. Brown, also known as Bear
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: March 23, 2016
Filed: March 28, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Charles L. Brown directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1
after he pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking
1
The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.
crime. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v.
California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence was unreasonable. We
conclude that Brown’s appeal waiver should be enforced and prevents consideration
of his claim. See United States v. Scott,
627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo
review of validity and applicability of appeal waiver); United States v. Andis,
333
F.3d 886, 889-90 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (court should enforce appeal waiver and
dismiss appeal where it falls within scope of waiver, plea agreement and waiver were
entered into knowingly and voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result).
Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75 (1988),
we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and we grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw.
______________________________
-2-