
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Christopher HATFIELD, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-3719
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: September 5, 2017
    Filed: September 8, 2017
    Angela C. Hasty, The Law Office of Angela Hasty, L.L.C., Leawood, KS, for appellant.
    Bruce A. Rhoades, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
    Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Shawn Hatfield directly appeals the sentence the district court imposed after he pled guilty to drug and money-laundering offenses, pursuant to a plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), essentially arguing that the district court imposed an unreasonable sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is valid and enforceable. See United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of validity and applicability of appeal waiver); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced 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). Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw. 
      
      . The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
     