United States v. Jamal Griffin, No. 18-3352 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Grasz, and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. Defendant executed a valid, enforceable and applicable appeal waiver and the appeal is dismissed. [ July 15, 2019
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3352 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Jamal Ali Griffin lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: July 11, 2019 Filed: July 16, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Jamal Griffin directly appeals after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense, under a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, and the district court1 sentenced him 1 The Honorable Greg Kays, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. to an above-Guidelines prison term. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Griffin has filed a pro se brief, also challenging the sentence as unreasonable. Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable, and applicable to the issue raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (validity and applicability of an appeal waiver is reviewed de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant counsel’s motion 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.
