United States v. Michael Golden, No. 17-3081 (8th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case
Court Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bowman and Erickson, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal case. Anders. Defendant executed a valid, applicable and enforceable appeal waiver as part of his guilty plea, and the appeal is dismissed; court would not consider claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 17-3081 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Michael Shane Golden lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs ____________ Submitted: July 17, 2018 Filed: July 20, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Michael Golden directly appeals the within-Guidelines sentence the district court imposed after he pled guilty to a firearm offense pursuant to a plea agreement 1 1 The Honorable Susan O. Hickey, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. containing an appeal waiver. Golden’s counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive and procedural reasonableness of Golden’s sentence. Golden has filed a pro se supplemental brief, in which he challenges the reasonableness of his sentence and appears to claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. As to the arguments challenging the procedural and substantive reasonableness of the sentence, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, applicable, 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, 890-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers). Further, we decline to consider Golden’s ineffective-assistance claim in this direct appeal, see United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824, 826-27 (8th Cir. 2006) (ineffective-assistance claims are best litigated in collateral proceedings, where record can be properly developed). Finally, having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we dismiss this appeal. ______________________________ -2-