United States of America v. Jazmyne L. McMiller

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-2643
___________________________
United States of America,
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,
v.
Jazmyne L. McMiller,
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
____________
Submitted: March 11, 2024
Filed: June 3, 2024
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, Chief Judge, ERICKSON and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Jazmyne McMiller pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit wire fraud, see 18
U.S.C. § 1349, after submitting fraudulent applications for loans administered by the
Small Business Administration. McMiller signed a plea agreement in which she
waived her right to appeal her sentence unless she alleged ineffective assistance of

-- 1 of 3 --

counsel. The district court calculated an advisory sentencing guideline range of 21
to 27 months’ imprisonment, departed and varied downward from the range, and
sentenced McMiller to a year and a day in prison.
McMiller appeals her sentence, and the government argues that we should
enforce the appeal waiver. We will enforce a defendant’s waiver if the appeal falls
within the scope of the waiver, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into
the waiver and the plea agreement, and there is no miscarriage of justice. United
States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-90 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
McMiller’s plea agreement states that she “knowingly and expressly waives
any and all rights to appeal [her] conviction and sentence,” except for claims alleging
ineffective assistance of counsel. McMiller does not argue that her counsel was
ineffective, so her appeal falls within the scope of her waiver.
The record establishes that McMiller’s waiver was knowing and voluntary.
The district court questioned McMiller about her decision to enter the agreement and
waive the right to appeal. See id. at 891. At her change-of-plea hearing, McMiller
stated that she had read the plea agreement and discussed it with her lawyer.
McMiller confirmed that she was not forced by anyone to sign the plea agreement,
and that she waived her rights freely and voluntarily. McMiller specifically agreed
that she knew she had a right to appeal and was “giving up that right.”
McMiller makes a conclusory assertion that she was the victim of sentencing
manipulation, but she has not alleged any improper conduct by law enforcement
intended solely to enhance her potential sentence. See United States v. Sacus, 784
F.3d 1214, 1220 (8th Cir. 2015). McMiller also asserts that her sentence is
unreasonable because of a disparity between her sentence and the sentence of a co-
conspirator. But the statutory direction to avoid unwarranted disparities among
defendants refers to national disparities, not differences among co-conspirators,
-2-

-- 2 of 3 --

United States v. Pierre, 870 F.3d 845, 850 (8th Cir. 2017), and McMiller has not
demonstrated a miscarriage of justice that would justify avoiding her appeal waiver.
For these reasons, we enforce McMiller’s appeal waiver and dismiss the
appeal.
______________________________
-3-

-- 3 of 3 --