United States of America v. Chad Demonn Walker

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-2836
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Chad Demonn Walker
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of North Dakota - Western
____________
Submitted: May 28, 2026
Filed: June 2, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Chad Walker appeals the below-Guidelines sentence the district court1 imposed
after he pleaded guilty to drug offenses pursuant to a written plea agreement
1The Honorable Daniel M. Traynor, United States District Judge for the
Western District of North Dakota.

-- 1 of 2 --

containing an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has
filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the
substantive reasonableness of the sentence. Walker has filed 2 motions to appoint
counsel and a pro se brief, challenging a dismissed count of the indictment.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable,
and applicable to the issues raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d
702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of validity and applicability of appeal
waiver); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc)
(appeal waiver will be enforced 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; one way district court can ensure
plea agreement and appeal waiver are knowing and voluntary is to question defendant
about decision to enter into agreement and waive right to appeal).
We have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the
appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, deny as moot
Walker’s motions for appointment of counsel, and dismiss this appeal.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --