United States v. Torres

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Torres

559 F. App'x 597

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJune 5, 2014

DocketNo. 13-3034

StatusPublished

This text of 559 F. App'x 597 (United States v. Torres) 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. Torres, 559 F. App'x 597 (8th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jose Torres appeals the sentence imposed by the district court¹ after he pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and [598]*598has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), raising as issues whether the district court erred in accepting Torres’s guilty plea or in sentencing him.

Torres pled guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, which we enforce. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc). After careful review of the record, we are satisfied that Torres entered into both the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, as demonstrated by his sworn responses to the district court’s questions during the change-of-plea hearing. See Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir.1997). In addition, we conclude that the issues raised in this appeal fall within the scope of the appeal waiver, and that no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. Finally, having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the waiver. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.

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

PER CURIAM.

Jose Torres appeals the sentence imposed by the district court¹ after he pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy offense. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and [598]*598has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), raising as issues whether the district court erred in accepting Torres’s guilty plea or in sentencing him.

Torres pled guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, which we enforce. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc). After careful review of the record, we are satisfied that Torres entered into both the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, as demonstrated by his sworn responses to the district court’s questions during the change-of-plea hearing. See Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir.1997). In addition, we conclude that the issues raised in this appeal fall within the scope of the appeal waiver, and that no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. Finally, having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the waiver. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 F. App'x 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-torres-ca8-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack