United States v. Dennis McLallen ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 18-2048
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Dennis McLallen
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
    ____________
    Submitted: April 8, 2019
    Filed: April 12, 2019
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Dennis McLallen directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm
    offenses, under a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, and the district court1
    1
    The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western
    District of Missouri.
    sentenced him below the calculated Guidelines range. In a brief under Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), his appellate counsel questions whether trial counsel
    was ineffective in not objecting to Guidelines enhancements, suggests that the district
    court imposed an unreasonable sentence, and seeks leave to withdraw.
    We decline to consider the ineffective-assistance issues raised in the Anders
    brief. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 
    449 F.3d 824
    , 827 (8th Cir. 2006)
    (discussing limited circumstances in which ineffective-assistance claims are
    considered on direct appeal). Construing the Anders brief as also challenging the
    application of Guidelines enhancements, as well as the reasonableness of the sentence,
    we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, applicable, and enforceable. See United
    States v. Scott, 
    627 F.3d 702
    , 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of validity and
    applicability of appeal waiver); United States v. Andis, 
    333 F.3d 886
    , 889-92 (8th Cir.
    2003) (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers).
    Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal
    waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and grant counsel leave to withdraw.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-2048

Filed Date: 4/12/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/12/2019