United States v. Renargo Martin, No. 16-1944 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Loken, Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. The appeal waiver provision in defendant's plea agreement is enforceable, and the appeal is dismissed. The court declines to consider a claim of ineffective assistance as it should be brought in a collateral proceeding where the record can be developed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1944 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Renargo L. Martin, also known as Ricoh lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: August 18, 2017 Filed: August 23, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Renargo Martin directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to robbery charges, and the district court1 imposed a sentence consistent with Martin’s Federal Rule of 1 The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, which contained an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), acknowledging the appeal waiver, and relaying Martin’s contentions that there was an insufficient basis for his conviction and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable. In particular, we note that Martin’s own statements at the change-of-plea hearing indicated that he knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and appeal waiver. 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) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers); Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997) (defendant’s representations during plea-taking carry strong presumption of verity). As to the ineffective-assistance claim, we decline to consider it on direct appeal. See United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006) (noting that ineffective-assistance claims are usually best litigated in collateral proceedings where the record can be properly developed). Furthermore, we have 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 leave to withdraw, and we dismiss this appeal. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
