United States v. Luis Rodriguez ( 2022 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 22-1725
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Luis Ortiz Rodriguez
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
____________
Submitted: August 2, 2022
Filed: August 5, 2022
[Unpublished]
____________
Before GRUENDER, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Luis Ortiz Rodriguez appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he
pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses, pursuant to a plea agreement containing
1
The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.
an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of the
prison sentence on the drug conviction and raising claims of ineffective assistance of
counsel.
Upon de novo review, we conclude the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable, and
applicable to the sentencing issues raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott,
627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review). Rodriguez’s arguments fall
within the scope of the waiver, the record shows he entered into the plea agreement
and waiver knowingly and voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result
from enforcing the waiver. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th
Cir. 2003) (en banc); Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997).
We will not review Rodriguez’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct
appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 827 (8th Cir. 2006).
Finally, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for review outside the scope of the
appeal waiver.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-