United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-2724 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Diondrey Hardwict, also known as CJ lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________ Submitted: September 15, 2022 Filed: October 3, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SHEPHERD, MELLOY, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM.

Diondrey Hardwict received a 216-month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute fentanyl. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C). As part of the plea agreement, he signed a broad appeal waiver.

Hardwict’s briefing suggests that the waiver is unenforceable and that the district court1 should have reduced the restitution award or eliminated it altogether.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing the validity of an appeal waiver de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889–92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (explaining that an 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). And as to the specific restitution issue that Hardwict’s counsel discusses, we conclude that there has been no error. See United States v. Kramer, 12 F.3d 130, 131–32 (8th Cir. 1993). We accordingly dismiss the appeal and grant counsel permission to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). ______________________________

The Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. -2-