Opinion
No. 19-2105
04-13-2020
United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kristian Bartholomew Price, Originally named Kristian Price Defendant - Appellant
Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock [Unpublished] Before LOKEN, ERICKSON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
Kristian Price appeals after he pled guilty to a child pornography offense, pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, and the district court sentenced him within the advisory range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing the appeal waiver is unenforceable and Price's sentence is substantively unreasonable. This court required supplemental briefing on these issues.
The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Upon careful de novo review, we conclude the appeal waiver is valid, applicable, and enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo validity and applicability of appeal waiver); 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 plea agreement and waiver, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and there are no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and we grant the government's motion to dismiss this appeal.