United States v. Ray Anthony Jame

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Pasco M. Bowman and Raymond W. Gruender (UNPUBLISHED); [4270887-2] Granting the motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Kevin M O'Brien. [4280851-2] Denying the motion for appointment of counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Ray Anthony James. [4309970] [15-1652]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-1652
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Ray Anthony James, also known as Anthony Paul Morgan
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
____________
Submitted: August 21, 2015
Filed: August 26, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Ray James, who entered into a written plea agreement and pleaded guilty to an
immigration offense, appeals from the sentence imposed by the District Court.1 His
1

The Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the
District of Minnesota.

Appellate Case: 15-1652

Page: 1

Date Filed: 08/26/2015 Entry ID: 4309970

counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that James’s sentence is unreasonable.
James has moved for appointment of new counsel and has filed a pro se brief
asserting claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
We decline to consider James’s ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal.
See United States v. Woods, 717 F.3d 654, 657 (8th Cir. 2013) (“Claims of
ineffective assistance of counsel . . . are usually best litigated in collateral
proceedings.” (citation to quoted case omitted)). As to all other issues raised, we
enforce the appeal waiver in James’s written plea agreement. See United States v.
Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889–92 (8th Cir.) (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal
waivers), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 997 (2003). Furthermore, we have independently
reviewed the record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), and
we find no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly,
we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we dismiss this appeal. We also deny
James’s motion for appointment of new counsel.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 15-1652

Page: 2

Date Filed: 08/26/2015 Entry ID: 4309970