United States v. Elgin Dothage ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 18-1374
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Elgin Eugene Dothage, also known as Butch
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Missouri - St. Joseph
    ____________
    Submitted: January 10, 2019
    Filed: January 15, 2019
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Elgin Eugene Dothage directly appeals the below-Guidelines sentence the
    district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to drug and firearm offenses. Having
    1
    The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the
    Western District of Missouri.
    jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court dismisses the appeal based on the
    appeal waiver.
    Counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders
    v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), acknowledging an appeal waiver in Dothage’s
    plea agreement, and asserting that the district court committed a procedural error and
    abused its discretion at sentencing. In a pro se brief, Dothage asserts defense counsel
    was ineffective.
    After careful review, this court concludes that the appeal waiver is enforceable.
    The record demonstrates that Dothage entered into the plea agreement and the appeal
    waiver knowingly and voluntarily. See Nguyen v. United States, 
    114 F.3d 699
    , 703
    (8th Cir. 1997) (defendant’s representations during plea-taking carry strong
    presumption of verity). This court further concludes that counsel’s arguments fall
    within the scope of the waiver. See United States v. Scott, 
    627 F.3d 702
    , 704 (8th Cir.
    2010) (de novo review); United States v. Andis, 
    333 F.3d 886
    , 890-92 (8th Cir. 2003)
    (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers). The court declines to address
    Dothage’s ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal. See United States v.
    Ramirez-Hernandez, 
    449 F.3d 824
    , 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006) (ineffective-assistance
    claims are usually best litigated in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings, where record can
    be properly developed). This court has reviewed the record independently under
    Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), and has found no non-frivolous issues.
    The appeal is dismissed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
    ______________________________
    -2-