United States v. Ruben Vasquez ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 22-3208
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Ruben Vasquez
    Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Iowa - Western
    ____________
    Submitted: May 1, 2023
    Filed: May 4, 2023
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Ruben Vasquez appeals after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute
    methamphetamine. The district court1 sentenced him, pursuant to an agreement
    1
    The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern
    District of Iowa.
    containing an appeal waiver, to a within-Guidelines-range prison term. Having
    jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , this court dismisses the appeal based on the
    appeal waiver.
    Counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the
    sentence. The appeal waiver is valid and enforceable, as the issue raised in this
    appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, the record shows that Vasquez
    entered into the agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, and no
    miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing 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
    , 889-90 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (enforcing appeal waiver if appeal
    falls within scope of waiver, defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into
    waiver and plea agreement, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of
    justice).
    This court has independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
     (1988), and finds no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal
    waiver.
    The appeal is dismissed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
    ______________________________
    -2-