United States v. Joshua Bowers

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJune 18, 2019
Docket18-3632
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Joshua Bowers (United States v. Joshua Bowers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Joshua Bowers, (8th Cir. 2019).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-3632 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Joshua K. Bowers

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - St. Joseph ____________

Submitted: June 11, 2019 Filed: June 18, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________

Before COLLOTON, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Joshua Bowers pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(i), (viii), 846, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(a). As part of his plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal unless, as relevant here, he received a sentence falling outside the plea agreement’s recommended range of 180 to 360 months in prison. The district court1 gave him a 310-month total prison sentence, which counsel suggests is substantively unreasonable in a brief citing Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

We review the validity and applicability of an appeal waiver de novo. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010). Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable and that it is applicable to the issue that Bowers has raised. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889–92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (explaining that an appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record and conclude that no other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83 (1988). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Greg Kays, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Scott
627 F.3d 702 (Eighth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. John Robert Andis
333 F.3d 886 (Eighth Circuit, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Joshua Bowers, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-joshua-bowers-ca8-2019.