United States of America v. Chauncey Allen White

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-2762
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Chauncey Allen White
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Northern
____________
Submitted: June 12, 2026
Filed: June 29, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Chauncey White pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to two counts of
sexual abuse of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2243(a), and 2246(2)(A).
The district court1 sentenced White to a total term of imprisonment of 320 months
1 The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the
District of South Dakota.

-- 1 of 3 --

-2-
to run consecutively with a 32-month sentence imposed in another case. White
appeals on the grounds that the district court miscalculated the appropriate
sentencing guidelines range and imposed an otherwise substantively unreasonable
sentence. We dismiss the appeal because White knowingly and voluntarily waived
his right to appeal his sentence as part of his plea agreement.
“We review the validity and applicability of an appeal waiver de novo.”
United States v. Williams, 81 F.4th 835, 839 (8th Cir. 2023). “So long as there is no
miscarriage of justice, we will enforce a defendant’s waiver if the appeal falls within
the scope of the waiver and the defendant entered into the waiver and the plea
agreement knowingly and voluntarily.” United States v. Seizys, 864 F.3d 930, 931
(8th Cir. 2017).
There is no question that White’s appeal falls within the scope of the waiver
in his plea agreement. The district court’s 320-month sentence was below the
advisory sentencing guidelines range, and White does not contest that his plea
agreement extinguished his right to challenge the calculation or reasonableness of a
within- or below-Guidelines sentence. We also agree with the Government that
White entered knowingly and voluntarily into the waiver. Before accepting the plea
agreement, the district court held a hearing at which it informed White that, under
the agreement, he had preserved his right to appeal his sentence based on ineffective
assistance of counsel or if it sentenced him “to a sentence that is longer than called
for by the advisory guideline range.” The court then explained to White that he had
otherwise “given up all right to appeal” his sentence and that he would “have no
place to go,” including “the Court of Appeals,” if he did not “like what [the district
court did] in [his] case as to the facts or the law or in general what [his] sentence is.”
When the district court asked whether he understood these aspects of the plea
agreement, White answered “Yes.” Therefore, contrary to the assertions in his reply
brief, the record establishes that White knowingly and voluntarily waived his right
to pursue this appeal. Finally, this case does not present circumstances implicating
the miscarriage-of-justice exception to a valid appeal waiver. See Hunter v. United
States, 608 U.S. ---, 2026 WL 1751815, at *8 (June 18, 2026) (concluding that

-- 2 of 3 --

-3-
miscarriage-of-justice exception applies when “sentence is marred by the kind of
egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute”); United States
v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 892 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (holding that “an allegation
that the sentencing judge misapplied the Sentencing Guidelines or abused his or her
discretion is not subject to appeal in the face of a valid appeal waiver”); see also
United States v. Sisco, 576 F.3d 791, 796 (8th Cir. 2009) (enforcing waiver of appeal
challenging substantive reasonableness of sentence that did not exceed statutory
maximum).
Accordingly, we dismiss White’s appeal.
______________________________

-- 3 of 3 --