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Submitted: August 13, 2019 Filed: August 16, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________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-