Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 09-30-2021
Case Style:
United States of America v. Antwan Baker, Sr.
Case Number: 20-2437
Judge: Before SHEPHERD, KELLY, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Court: United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
St. Louis, MO - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant with a a felon-in-possession charge. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw.
Antwan Deshon Baker appeals the sentence the district court1
imposed after he
pleaded guilty to a felon-in-possession offense, pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and hasfiled a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting that Baker’s
sentence was substantively unreasonable, and that enforcing the appeal waiver would
result in a miscarriage of justice. We conclude that the appeal waiver is valid and
enforceable, and that it applies to the issues counsel raises on 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, 890-92 (8th
Cir. 2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced 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; miscarriage-of-justice
exception is narrow and generally applies only to ineffective assistance of counsel,
or sentence that is above statutory range, violates plea agreement, or is based on
constitutionally impermissible factor).
Outcome: Having reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988),
we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: