United States v. Jodi Lynn Richter


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: ROGER L. WOLLMAN, LAVENSKI R. SMITH and RAYMOND W. GRUENDER (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [3787544-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Joe A Johnson.; denying [3810418-2] motion for appointment of counsel filed by Appellant Ms. Jodi Lynn Richter. [3839052] [11-1420]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-1420 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Jodi Lynn Richter, also known as Nurse Betty, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * District of North Dakota. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: October 7, 2011 Filed: October 14, 2011 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Jodi Richter challenges the sentence imposed by the district court1 upon her guilty plea to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute in excess of 500 grams of a methamphetamine mixture. She entered her guilty plea pursuant to a written plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver. Her counsel moves to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), acknowledging the appeal waiver, but arguing that a defendant 1 The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota. Appellate Case: 11-1420 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/14/2011 Entry ID: 3839052 should be permitted to seek appellate review of the judgment and imposition of sentence by the district court notwithstanding an appeal waiver. Richter seeks appointment of new counsel. We conclude that this appeal is barred by the appeal waiver. The appeal falls within the scope of the waiver; the record establishes that Richter knowingly and voluntarily entered into both the plea agreement and the appeal waiver; and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (setting forth criteria for enforcing appeal waiver). We have also reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), and we have found no non-frivolous issue for appeal beyond the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we deny Richter’s motion for new counsel. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 11-1420 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/14/2011 Entry ID: 3839052

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?