The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
15-3672•United States of America v. Jaime Guerrero-Robledo
15-3672Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitJul 31, 2017
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-4336
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Jaime Guerrero-Robledo
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln
____________
Submitted: July 14, 2017
Filed: July 25, 2017
[Unpublished]
____________
Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Jaime Guerrero-Robledo challenges the sentence the district court imposed1
after he pled guilty to an immigration offense, pursuant to a plea agreement that
The Honorable John M. Gerrard, United States District Judge for the District1
of Nebraska.
-- 1 of 2 --
contained an appeal waiver. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), asking the court to disregard the appeal waiver, and arguing that
the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Counsel also seeks leave to withdraw.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, applicable,
and enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de
novo review of validity and applicability of appeal waiver); United States v. Andis,
333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced if
appeal falls within scope of waiver, defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into
plea agreement and waiver, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of
justice). In addition, we have independently reviewed the record, pursuant to Penson
v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal
outside the scope of the waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and we grant
counsel leave to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.