
    UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mitchell JOHNSON Defendant-Appellant
    No. 17-1990
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 26, 2017
    Filed: October 31, 2017
    Kristin Huntington Bryant, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Mitchell Johnson, Pro Se
    Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea agreement that included a limited waiver of his right to appeal, Mitchell Johnson pleaded guilty to a charge of producing child pornography. The district court sentenced him to 262 months in prison, within the advisory Guidelines range, and he appeals. Johnson’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable; Johnson has filed a pro se supplemental brief, challenging a ruling on one of the sentence enhancements; and the, government has filed a motion to dismiss based on the appeal waiver.

Following careful review, we grant the government’s motion and enforce the appeal waiver because the arguments for reversal fall within the scope of the waiver, the record shows the requisite knowledge and voluntariness, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc). In addition, having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues that are not covered by the appeal waiver. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and defense counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. 
      
      . The Honorable D.P. Marshall, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
     