United States v. Angel Alberto Flores, No. 16-3961 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Bowman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into a plea agreement waiving his right of appeal, and the appeal is dismissed; court would not consider claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in this direct appeal.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-3961 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Angel Alberto Flores, also known as Jose Francisco Ochoa-Armenta, also known as Angel A. Flores, also known as Vincent Sanchez lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Bismarck ____________ Submitted: August 3, 2017 Filed: August 9, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Angel Flores directly appeals from the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to an immigration offense under a plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting that Flores may have received ineffective assistance of counsel, and raising several sentencing issues. We conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable. In particular, we note that Flores’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’s motion, and we dismiss this appeal ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota. -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.
