United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 23-2373 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Kevin Grant McMillan lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri ____________ Submitted: January 30, 2024 Filed: February 2, 2024 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM.

Kevin McMillan appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to knowingly engaging in a child exploitation enterprise. The plea came pursuant to a plea agreement in which McMillan waived his right to an appeal. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

McMillan has also moved for appointment of new counsel.

Upon careful review, we conclude 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) (reviewing validity and applicability of appeal waiver de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (enforcing appeal waiver if appeal falls within scope of waiver, defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into plea agreement and waiver, and it would not result in 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 appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and deny McMillan’s motions for appointment of new counsel. ______________________________

The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

-2-