United States of America v. Byron Dequenson Williams

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-2948
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Byron Dequenson Williams
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
____________
Submitted: March 14, 2025
Filed: March 19, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before BENTON, GRASZ, KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Byron Williams appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled
guilty to a drug offense pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an appeal
1The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.

-- 1 of 2 --

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 reasonableness of the
sentence. Williams has filed a pro se motion for appointment of new counsel.
Upon careful review, we conclude 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) (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 waiver and plea agreement, and enforcing waiver would
not result in miscarriage of justice).
We have 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 appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, deny the
motion for appointment of counsel as moot, and dismiss the appeal based on the
appeal waiver.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --