United States v. James Dawson, No. 14-3131 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. Defendant filed a valid waiver of his right of appeal, and his appeal is dismissed. [ March 19, 2015
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-3131 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. James Dawson lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs ____________ Submitted: March 13, 2015 Filed: March 20, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. James Dawson directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to a federal drug charge, and the district court1 sentenced him below the calculated Guidelines range. His 1 The Honorable Susan O. Hickey, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Dawson has filed a pro se supplemental brief raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. After careful de novo review, see United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010), we will enforce the appeal waiver in Dawson’s plea agreement, because the arguments raised in this appeal fall within the scope of the waiver, Dawson’s testimony at the plea hearing shows that he entered into the waiver knowingly and voluntarily, and dismissing the appeal based on the waiver will not result in a miscarriage of justice, see United States v. Guzman, 707 F.3d 938, 941 (8th Cir. 2013). Further, 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. This appeal is dismissed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted subject to counsel informing appellant about procedures for seeking rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari. ______________________________ -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.
