United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 18-3624
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Russell Eugene Wolf
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: August 13, 2019
Filed: August 16, 2019
[Unpublished]
____________
Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Russell Wolf appeals after he pleaded guilty to production of child
pornography, under a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver, and the district
court1 sentenced him to a below-Guidelines prison term. His counsel has moved for
leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), raising the voluntariness of the plea and the reasonableness of the sentence.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable,
and applicable to the issue raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d
702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (validity and applicability of an appeal waiver is reviewed
de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc)
(appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the
defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver,
and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We have also
independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and
have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the waiver.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri.
-2-