United States of America v. Valeriece D. Ealom

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 20-1231
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Valeriece D. Ealom
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: July 28, 2020
Filed: July 31, 2020
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Valeriece Ealom appeals after she pleaded guilty to a drug offense and the
district court1 imposed a sentence consistent with her binding Federal Rule of
1The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.

-- 1 of 2 --

Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, which contained an appeal waiver.
Her counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing the sentence is unreasonable.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable,
and applicable to the issue raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d
702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (validity and applicability of an appeal waiver is reviewed
de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc)
(appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the
defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver,
and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also
independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and
have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the waiver.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --