United States v. Ryan Matone, No. 21-1267 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Erickson, Grasz, and Stras, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. Defendant's appeal of the district court's suppression order and the reasonableness of his sentence is barred by the appeal waiver in his guilty plea, and the appeal is dismissed. [ October 08, 2021 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1267 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Ryan Matone lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs ____________ Submitted: September 29, 2021 Filed: October 12, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before ERICKSON, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Ryan Matone pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and received a 151-month prison sentence. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B). As part of the plea agreement, he waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence, except for certain circumstances that are absent here. In an Anders brief, Matone’s counsel raises the district court’s 1 denial of a motion to suppress and the substantive reasonableness of the sentence as potential issues on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is both enforceable and applicable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing this issue de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889–92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (explaining that an appeal waiver will be enforced if the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver, the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, and it would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also independently reviewed the record and conclude that no other nonfrivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83 (1988). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel permission to withdraw. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Susan O. Hickey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. -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.
