United States v. Michael Sheehan, No. 17-2197 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Benton, Murphy and Erickson, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. Defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into an appeal waiver as part of his plea agreement, and the issues he seeks to raise are within its scope; appeal dismissed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 17-2197 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Michael A. Sheehan lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield ____________ Submitted: January 26, 2018 Filed: February 14, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BENTON, MURPHY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Michael Sheehan directly appeals after he pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, and the district court1 sentenced him as an armed career 1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. criminal. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning the reasonableness of Sheehan’s sentence, but conceding that an appeal waiver in the plea agreement is applicable. We conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of validity and applicability of appeal waiver). Sheehan concedes that he entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, the arguments on appeal fall within the scope of the waiver, and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc). In addition, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we dismiss this 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.
