United States v. Kelvin Williams, No. 22-1844 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Gruender, and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. Defendant's sentencing issues fell within the scope of his valid and enforceable appeal waiver, and the appeal is dismissed. [ September 19, 2022 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-1844 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kelvin R. Williams, also known as Chop Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: September 15, 2022 Filed: September 20, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Kelvin R. Williams appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court dismisses the appeal based on the appeal waiver. Williams challenges the below-Guidelines sentence the district court 1 imposed. Counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel acknowledges the appeal waiver but argues that the Guidelines base offense level and a three-level aggravating-role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b) were based on unreliable hearsay. The appeal waiver is enforceable, as counsel’s arguments fall within the scope of the appeal waiver, the record shows that Williams entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, 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, 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); see also 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B) (maximum prison sentence is 40 years). This court has reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and has found no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. The appeal is dismissed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable David Gregory Kays, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -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.
