United States v. Claudia Rodriguez-Rivera , 334 F. App'x 41 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 08-1786
    ___________
    United States of America,             *
    *
    Appellee,                 *
    *
    v.                              * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    Claudia Rodriguez-Rivera,             * District of Minnesota.
    also known as Claudia Rodriguez,      *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: September 1, 2009
    Filed: October 13, 2009
    ___________
    Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, Claudia
    Rodriguez-Rivera pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute approximately 140 grams
    of actual methamphetamine, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C. §§ 841
    (a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and
    846. The district court1 sentenced Rodriguez-Rivera to 97 months in prison and 5
    years of supervised release. On appeal, her counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), in which he requests leave to withdraw. Counsel
    1
    The Honorable Patrick J. Schiltz, United States District Judge for the District
    of Minnesota.
    challenges the reasonableness of Rodriguez-Rivera’s sentence, and suggests that she
    did not knowingly and voluntarily waive her right to appeal her sentence and that
    enforcing the appeal waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice.
    Upon careful review, we conclude that Rodriguez-Rivera knowingly and
    voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver, that the
    reasonableness of her sentence falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, and that
    enforcing the appeal waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. See United
    States v. Andis, 
    333 F.3d 886
    , 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (court will enforce
    appeal waiver where both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and
    voluntarily, appeal falls within scope of waiver, and no miscarriage of justice would
    result); see also United States v. Estrada-Bahena, 
    201 F.3d 1070
    , 1071 (8th Cir. 2000)
    (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case).
    Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    ,
    80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issue for appeal beyond the scope of the appeal
    waiver. Accordingly, we enforce the appeal waiver and dismiss the appeal. We grant
    defense counsel’s motion to withdraw on condition that counsel inform appellant
    about the procedures for filing petitions for rehearing and for certiorari.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-1786

Citation Numbers: 334 F. App'x 41

Filed Date: 10/13/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023