United States v. Keyessence Fountain , 586 F. App'x 247 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 14-2176
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Keyessence Fountain
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
    ____________
    Submitted: December 2, 2014
    Filed: December 5, 2014
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Keyessence Fountain directly appeals after she pled guilty to robbery and
    firearm charges, and the district court1 sentenced her below the calculated Guidelines
    1
    The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States District Judge for the
    Eastern District of Missouri.
    range. Her counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), acknowledging an appeal waiver in Fountain’s plea
    agreement.
    After careful de novo review, we enforce the appeal waiver, because the record
    shows Fountain entered into both the plea agreement and the 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) (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); see also United States v. Scott, 
    627 F.3d 702
    , 704
    (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review); Nguyen v. United States, 
    114 F.3d 699
    , 703 (8th
    Cir. 1997) (defendant’s statements made during plea hearing carry strong
    presumption of verity).
    Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal
    waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal, and we grant counsel’s motion to
    withdraw, subject to counsel informing Fountain about the procedures for seeking
    rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-2176

Citation Numbers: 586 F. App'x 247

Filed Date: 12/5/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023