United States of America v. Lamont Elliott, also known as Lamont William Elliott

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-1648
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Lamont Elliott, also known as Lamont William Elliott
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: September 7, 2023
Filed: September 19, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Lamont Elliott appeals after he pleaded guilty to distributing methamphetamine
pursuant to a plea agreement that includes an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved
to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

-- 1 of 2 --

raising challenges to the voluntariness of Elliott’s plea and the sentence imposed by
the district court.1
Upon careful review, we conclude that Elliott is precluded from challenging
the voluntariness of his guilty plea in this appeal because he withdrew his pro se
motion to withdraw the plea in the district court. See United States v. Gamboa, 701
F.3d 265, 267-68 (8th Cir. 2012); United States v. Umanzor, 617 F.3d 1053, 1060
(8th Cir. 2010). We enforce the appeal waiver as to the remaining challenge to his
sentence. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010); United States
v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
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 outside the scope
of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we
dismiss the appeal.
______________________________
1The Honorable Sarah E. Pitlyk, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --