United States of America v. Christine N. Hughes

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-2784
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Christine N. Hughes
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Southern
____________
Submitted: February 2, 2026
Filed: February 5, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Christine Hughes appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after she
pled guilty to a drug conspiracy offense pursuant to a plea agreement containing an
1The Honorable Roberto Lange, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the District of South Dakota.

-- 1 of 2 --

appeal waiver. Her counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive
reasonableness of the sentence. Hughes has filed a pro se brief challenging her
sentence and arguing that counsel was ineffective.
We decline to address Hughes’s ineffective-assistance claim in this direct
appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir.
2006) (ineffective-assistance claims are usually best raised in collateral proceedings
where record can be properly developed). We conclude that the appeal waiver is
valid, enforceable, and applicable to the remaining issues raised in this appeal. See
United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo validity
and applicability of appeal waiver); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th
Cir. 2003) (en banc) (enforcing appeal waiver 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).
Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the
appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and dismiss this
appeal.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --