United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-1029 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Shane Douglass Davison

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Rapid City ____________

Submitted: September 13, 2018 Filed: September 18, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Shane Davison directly appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to enticement of a minor using the internet, pursuant to a plea

1 The Honorable Jeffrey L. Viken, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. agreement containing an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence.

We will enforce the appeal waiver, because our review of the record demonstrates that Davison entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, his challenge to the sentence falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers). Further, we have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and we dismiss this appeal. ______________________________

-2-