Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
U.S. v. DUEKER, 357 Fed.Appx. 726 (8th Cir. 2009)
United States, Appellee, v. Jeffrey Dewain DUEKER, Appellant., 357 F. App'x 726 (8th Cir. 2009)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 2009-12-21
- Topic
- general
U.S. v. DUEKER, 357 Fed.Appx. 726 (8th Cir. 2009) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jeffrey Dewain DUEKER, Appellant. Nos. 08-2030, 08-2039.United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.Submitted: December 16, 2009. Filed: December 21, 2009. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed U.S. v. DUEKER, 357 Fed.Appx. 726 (8th Cir. 2009). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
U.S. v. DUEKER,357 Fed.Appx. 726(8th Cir. 2009)
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jeffrey Dewain DUEKER, Appellant.
Nos. 08-2030, 08-2039.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: December 16, 2009.
Filed: December 21, 2009.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
Larry C. Pace, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Raymond C. Conrad, Jr., Fed. Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant.
Katharine Fincham, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
Katharine Fincham, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
[UNPUBLISHED]
Jeffrey Dueker appeals his sentence of 252 months in prison and ten years of supervised release imposed by the district court1after he pleaded guilty to two counts of receipt of child pornography, in violation of18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2), and one count of being a felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and924(a)(2). His counsel has filed a brief underAnders v. California,386 U.S. 738,87 S.Ct. 1396,18 L.Ed.2d 493(1967), challenging the sentence as unreasonable. This challenge, however, falls within the scope of the appeal waiver contained in Dueker's plea agreement. Because the record shows that Dueker knowingly and voluntarily entered into the waiver and the plea agreement, and because we see nothing to suggest that enforcement of the waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice, we will enforce the appeal waiver in these consolidated appeals.See UnitedStates v. Andis,333 F.3d 886,889-92(8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (court will enforce appeal waiver in plea agreement when appeal falls within scope of waiver, both waiver and plea agreement were entered into knowingly and voluntarily, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice).
Having reviewed the record independently underPenson v.Ohio,488 U.S. 75,80,109 S.Ct. 346,102 L.Ed.2d 300(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues that are not encompassed by the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we dismiss the appeals.
Having reviewed the record independently underPenson v.Ohio,488 U.S. 75,80,109 S.Ct. 346,102 L.Ed.2d 300(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues that are not encompassed by the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we dismiss the appeals.