United States of America v. Kyle Jackson

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted April 19, 2022
Decided April 20, 2022
Before
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge
DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge
CANDACE JACKSON-AKIWUMI, Circuit Judge
No. 21-1814
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
KYLE JACKSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of
Indiana, Hammond Division.
No. 2:20CR56-001
James T. Moody,
Judge.
O R D E R
Kyle Jackson pleaded guilty to making a false statement while purchasing a
firearm, 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6), and the district court sentenced him within the guidelines
range to 27 months in prison with 2 years’ supervised release. Although his plea
agreement contains an appeal waiver, Jackson appealed. His appointed counsel asserts
that the appeal is frivolous and moves to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738, 744 (1967). Counsel’s brief explains the nature of the case and raises potential issues
that an appeal like this would be expected to involve. Because her analysis appears
thorough, and Jackson has not responded to counsel’s motion, see C IR . R. 51(b), we limit
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with F ED. R. APP . P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 21-1814 Page 2
our review to the subjects that counsel discusses. See United States v. Bey, 748 F.3d 774,
776 (7th Cir. 2014).
We agree with counsel that Jackson’s appeal waiver forecloses any appellate
argument. Counsel tells us that she conferred with her client and Jackson does not wish
to challenge his guilty plea, only the length of his sentence. See United States v. Konczak,
683 F.3d 348, 349 (7th Cir. 2012). But, in his plea agreement, Jackson “expressly waive[d]
[his] right to appeal or to contest [his] conviction and all components of [his] sentence or
the manner in which [his] conviction or [his] sentence was determined or imposed, to
any Court on any ground.” An appeal waiver “stands or falls with the underlying
agreement and plea,” and because Jackson does not want to challenge the plea
agreement, the appeal waiver blocks this appeal. United States v. Nulf, 978 F.3d 504, 506
(7th Cir. 2020). Further, counsel correctly deems frivolous any argument that an
exception to the appeal waiver could apply. See id. Jackson’s 27-month sentence was
less than the 10-year statutory maximum sentence that he faced, 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2),
and his 2-year supervised-release term was below the 3-year maximum for a Class C
felony. See id. §§ 3583(b)(2), 3559(a)(3). Additionally, the record does not reasonably
suggest that the judge considered any constitutionally impermissible factor at
sentencing.
Therefore, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.

-- 2 of 2 --