United States v. Michael Knight, No. 16-3670 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Loken and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence, and the appeal is dismissed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-3670 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Michael Knight lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: July 19, 2017 Filed: July 24, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Michael Knight challenges the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to drug and gun charges, pursuant to 1 The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. a written plea agreement. His counsel has moved to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising the reasonableness of the sentence. We conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable, because our review of the record demonstrates that Knight entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, see Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997); the argument falls within the scope of the waiver; and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver, see United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 890-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc). 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 waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion, 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.
