United States v. Michael Alan Petzold, No. 09-1388 (8th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal Case - Anders. Defendant pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement containing an appeal waiver and waiver will be enforced. Claims on appeal fall within scope of appeal waiver.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 09-1388 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Michael Alan Petzold, Appellant. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * District of North Dakota. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: February 2, 2010 Filed: February 5, 2010 ___________ Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Michael Petzold challenges the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy, murder, and related charges. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Petzold pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement that contained a waiver of his right to appeal his sentence. We will enforce the appeal waiver here. 1 The Honorable Ralph Erickson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (court should enforce appeal waiver and dismiss appeal where it falls within scope of waiver, both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result). Petzold s argument on appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, the record shows the requisite knowledge and voluntariness, and we see nothing to suggest that a miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the appeal waiver. See United States v. Michelsen, 141 F.3d 867, 87172 (8th Cir. 1998) (appeal waiver is enforceable so long as it resulted from knowing and voluntary decision; examining personal characteristics of defendant and circumstances surrounding plea agreement when assessing knowledge and voluntariness of waiver). Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) for any nonfrivolous issues not covered by the waiver, we find none. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and we dismiss the 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.
