United States v. Jeffrey Wiederholt

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, Pasco M. Bowman and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4147841-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Jeffrey Dale Wiederholt. [4147844] [13-3013]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 13-3013
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Jeffrey Dale Wiederholt
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: April 23, 2014
Filed: April 28, 2014
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Jeffrey Wiederholt appeals the sentence that the district court1 imposed on him
following his guilty plea to child-pornography offenses. On appeal, counsel for

1

The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.

Appellate Case: 13-3013

Page: 1

Date Filed: 04/28/2014 Entry ID: 4147844

Wiederholt seeks leave to withdraw, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), he argues that the sentence is unreasonable.
The written plea agreement in this case contains an appeal waiver, which we
will enforce. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard
of review). After careful review of the plea transcript in this case, we are satisfied that
Wiederholt entered into both the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and
voluntarily, as demonstrated by his sworn responses to the district court’s questions
during the guilty-plea hearing. See Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th
Cir. 1997) (defendant’s statements made during plea hearing carry strong presumption
of verity). The waiver covers the argument raised in this appeal, and we conclude that
no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the appeal waiver in these
circumstances. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en
banc) (court should enforce appeal waiver and dismiss appeal where it falls within
scope of waiver, plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and
voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result).
Further, having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the waiver.
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 13-3013

Page: 2

Date Filed: 04/28/2014 Entry ID: 4147844