United States of America v. Justin Bradford

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-2087
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Justin Bradford
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota
____________
Submitted: November 22, 2024
Filed: December 10, 2024
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Justin Bradford appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pled
guilty to firearm and drug charges pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an
1The Honorable Jonathan A. Kobes, United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth
Circuit, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

appeal waiver. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of the
sentence. Bradford has filed a pro se brief challenging the calculation of the
imprisonment range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual.
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) (reviewing validity and applicability of appeal waiver de
novo); 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 waiver and plea agreement, and it would not result in
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 outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal
based on the appeal waiver, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --