United States v. Robert Odell, No. 18-2684 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Erickson, Wollman and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. Court would not consider claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in this direct appeal; defendant's other issues fell within the scope of his knowing and voluntary appeal waiver, and the appeal is dismissed. [ March 21, 2019
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-2684 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Robert J. Odell lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - St. Joseph ____________ Submitted: March 13, 2019 Filed: March 22, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before ERICKSON, WOLLMAN, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Robert Odell directly appeals the within-Guidelines-range sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to a firearm offense, pursuant to a plea agreement 1 The Honorable Beth Phillips, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. containing an appeal waiver. In a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), his counsel suggests that the court imposed an unreasonable sentence that did not adequately address the 18 U.S.C. ยง 3553(a) factors. Counsel also acknowledges the appeal waiver and moves for leave to withdraw. In a pro se brief, Odell asserts that his counsel misadvised him regarding sentencing matters. We decline, at this time, to consider any claims for ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Hernandez, 281 F.3d 746, 749 (8th Cir. 2002) (generally, ineffective-assistance claim is not cognizable on direct appeal). As to the remaining issues, we enforce the appeal waiver. 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, 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). Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and grant counsel leave to withdraw. ______________________________ -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.
