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)
20-2947•United States of America v. Roberto Lopez Gomez
20-2947Court of Appeals for the Eighth CircuitNov 30, 2021
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 21-1968
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Roberto Lopez Gomez
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa - Central1
____________
Submitted: November 3, 2021
Filed: November 18, 2021
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Roberto Lopez Gomez pleaded guilty to attempted enticement of a minor. See
18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). As part of the plea agreement, he waived the right to appeal
1 The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge
for the Southern District of Iowa.
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
his conviction, except for, as relevant here, ineffective assistance of counsel. An
Anders brief questions whether Gomez should have been allowed to plead guilty to
a different crime. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
We conclude that this issue falls squarely within the appeal waiver. See
United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing the validity of
an appeal waiver de novo); 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). And to the extent the brief suggests that plea counsel did a
poor job of representing Gomez during plea negotiations, a claim of this type is
“usually best litigated in collateral proceedings.” United States v. Ramirez-
Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826–27 (8th Cir. 2006).
Finally, we have 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 and grant counsel permission to withdraw.
______________________________
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.