United States v. Shelton Lewis

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, Pasco M. Bowman and Diana E. Murphy (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4326006-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Ms. Anita L. Burns. [4380620] [15-2992] (Original document edited by correcting the first word of the last line on Page 2.)--[Edited 03/23/2016 by CMD]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-2992
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Shelton E. Lewis, also known as C, also known as Steve Johnson
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: March 18, 2016
Filed: March 23, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Shelton E. Lewis directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1
after he pleaded guilty to extortionate communications and money laundering. His
1

The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.

Appellate Case: 15-2992

Page: 1

Date Filed: 03/23/2016 Entry ID: 4380620

counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence was unreasonable. Lewis has submitted
a pro se brief in which he argues that the district court abused its discretion in
imposing an above-Guidelines sentence, because the Guidelines’ enhancements
accounted for the seriousness of the offense, and the court did not adequately discuss
the section 3553(a) factors. We conclude that Lewis’s appeal waiver should be
enforced and prevents consideration of his claims. See United States v. Scott, 627
F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of validity and applicability of appeal
waiver); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-90 (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). Having independently reviewed the
record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for
appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and we grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 15-2992

Page: 2

Date Filed: 03/23/2016 Entry ID: 4380620