NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted March 31, 2009
Decided March 31, 2009
Before
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge
DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge
DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
No. 08‐2018
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appeal from the United States District
Plaintiff‐Appellee, Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division.
v.
No. 06 CR 33‐4
ALAN M. JUNGELS,
Defendant‐Appellant. James B. Zagel,
Judge.
O R D E R
Alan Jungels pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement that included an
appeal waiver, to one count of distributing child pornography. See 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(1).
The district court sentenced Jungels to 240 months in prison, the statutory maximum.
Jungels filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed counsel now seek to withdraw under
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), because they cannot discern a nonfrivolous basis for
appeal. Jungels has not accepted our invitation to comment on counsel’s motion. See CIR. R.
51(b). Because counsel’s supporting brief is adequate, we limit our review to the potential
issues identified in the brief. See United States v. Schuh, 289 F.3d 968, 973‐74 (7th Cir. 2002).
No. 08‐2018 Page 2
Counsel begin by telling us that Jungels does not wish to challenge his guilty plea.
So counsel appropriately refrain from discussing whether Jungels could argue that his plea
was not voluntary. See United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 670‐71 (7th Cir. 2002).
Counsel consider only one potential issue: whether Jungels can challenge his
sentence. But as counsel note, the appeal waiver forecloses any argument challenging his
sentence except a claim that the district court relied on a constitutionally impermissible
factor or that the sentence exceeded the statutory maximum. See United States v. Lockwood,
416 F.3d 604, 608 (7th Cir. 2005); United States v. Bownes, 405 F.3d 634, 637 (7th Cir. 2005).
Neither of those issues is relevant here; thus, any argument that the court erred in imposing
Jungels’s sentence would be frivolous.
Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.