Full Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 26-2080 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Octavio Huerta-Medina lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: November 9, 2026 Filed: November 13, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________ Before KELLY, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Octavio Huerta-Medina appeals the above-Guidelines-range sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a firearm offense pursuant to a 1 The Honorable David Gregory Kays, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. written plea 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), challenging the reasonableness of the sentence. Upon careful review, we conclude the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable, and applicable to the arguments raised in this appeal. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo validity and applicability of appeal waiver); 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 enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice). Further, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and dismiss this appeal. ______________________________ -2-