United States v. Byron Gorman, No. 16-4533 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender, Bowman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's challenge to the reasonableness of his sentence falls within the scope of his appeal waiver, and the appeal is dismissed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-4533 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Byron G. Gorman lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: July 20, 2017 Filed: July 25, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Byron Gorman appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to wire fraud pursuant to a plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver. 1 The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), requesting leave to withdraw, and arguing that Gorman’s above-Guidelines-range sentence is unreasonable. Gorman has filed a pro se brief, challenging the enforceability of the waiver and the reasonableness of his sentence. A challenge to the reasonableness of Gorman’s sentence falls within the scope of the plea agreement’s appeal waiver. Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is valid and enforceable. 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, 889-92 (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). Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw. ______________________________ -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.
