United States v. Twyla Adair

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-2902
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Twyla Lashelle Adair, also known as Twyla Mitchell, also known as Twyla
Downs, also known as T. L. King, also known as Twyla King
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: June 21, 2018
Filed: July 11, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Twyla Adair directly appeals the Guidelines-range sentence the district court1
imposed after she pled guilty to misusing social security numbers and aggravated
identity theft. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court dismisses the
appeal based on the appeal waiver.
Counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), acknowledging an appeal waiver in Adair’s plea
agreement, and otherwise challenging the reasonableness of her sentence. Adair has
filed a motion for new counsel and a letter to this court. In the letter, Adair
challenges the voluntariness of her plea, generally alleges the government breached
the plea agreement, asserts defense counsel was ineffective, and accuses the
prosecutor of unspecified misconduct.
This court concludes that the appeal waiver is enforceable. A review of the
record demonstrates that Adair entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver
knowingly and voluntarily. See Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir.
1997) (defendant’s representations during plea-taking carry strong presumption of
verity). There is no support for Adair’s contention that the government breached the
plea agreement. This court further concludes that counsel’s argument falls within the
scope of 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, 890-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc)
(discussing enforcement of appeal waivers). To the extent Adair is attempting to
raise an ineffective assistance claim, this court declines to address the claim on direct
appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir.
2006) (ineffective-assistance claims are usually best litigated in 28 U.S.C. § 2255proceedings, where record can be properly developed). There is no basis to support
a claim for prosecutorial misconduct. This court has reviewed the record
1
The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
-2-
independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and found no non-frivolous
issues.
The appeal is dismissed. Counsel’s request to withdraw is granted. Adair’s pro
se motion for new counsel is denied as moot.
______________________________
-3-