United States v. Norberto Dangla-Sanchez , 582 F. App'x 666 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 14-1736
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Norberto A. Dangla-Sanchez
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
    ____________
    Submitted: November 4, 2014
    Filed: November 7, 2014
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Norberto Dangla-Sanchez directly appeals after he pled guilty to a drug charge,
    and the district court1 sentenced him to a prison term below his calculated Guidelines
    1
    The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western
    District of Missouri.
    range. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), acknowledging an appeal waiver in Dangla-
    Sanchez’s plea agreement, questioning the reasonableness of the sentence imposed,
    and raising a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
    To begin, we decline to consider counsel’s ineffective-assistance claim on
    direct appeal. See United States v. McAdory, 
    501 F.3d 868
    , 872-73 (8th Cir. 2007)
    (ineffective-assistance claims are ordinarily deferred to 28 U.S.C. § 2255
    proceedings). As to counsel’s challenge to the reasonableness of the sentence, we
    enforce the appeal 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) (de novo review of validity and applicability
    of appeal waiver). Finally, having reviewed the record independently under Penson
    v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the
    appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal based upon the appeal waiver,
    and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-1736

Citation Numbers: 582 F. App'x 666

Judges: Wollman, Bye, Smith

Filed Date: 11/7/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024