United States v. Romeo Reccarro, 670 F. App'x 439

Defendant Romeo Reccarro pleaded guilty to a child-pornography charge pursuant to a plea agreement that included an appeal waiver.
The district court (Judge Ann D. Montgomery) sentenced Reccarro to a below-Guidelines prison term.
Reccarro appealed; counsel moved to withdraw and filed an Anders brief arguing the sentence was unreasonable.
Reccarro filed a pro se brief claiming ineffective assistance of counsel and that his guilty plea was coerced.
The Eighth Circuit declined to consider ineffective-assistance and voluntariness-of-plea claims on direct appeal, finding them inappropriate or waived in the district court.
The court independently reviewed the record under Penson and found no non-frivolous issues; it concluded the below-Guidelines sentence was not unreasonable and dismissed the appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Reccarro)	Defendant's Argument (Gov't/Counsel)	Held
Whether ineffective-assistance claim is reviewable on direct appeal	Counsel was ineffective	Claim should be litigated collaterally with a developed record	Not considered on direct appeal; usual remedy is collateral proceedings
Whether guilty plea was involuntary/coerced	Plea was coerced / not voluntary	Any plea concerns were withdrawn below and not preserved for appeal	Not considered; plea voluntariness not preserved for direct appeal
Whether appeal waiver bars review of sentence reasonableness	Waiver in plea agreement; Reccarro argues sentence unreasonable	Counsel acknowledges waiver but asks court to review reasonableness	Court did not rely on waiver; reviewed sentence and found it not unreasonable
Whether the below-Guidelines sentence was an abuse of discretion	Sentence was unreasonable	District court considered proper factors and reduced sentence in part on defense policy arguments	Held reasonable; no abuse of discretion; affirmed dismissal of appeal

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedural framework for appointed counsel to request withdrawal when appeal is frivolous)
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (U.S. 1988) (appellate courts must independently review the record when counsel seeks to withdraw)
United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824 (8th Cir. 2006) (ineffective-assistance claims generally better raised in collateral proceedings)
United States v. Foy, 617 F.3d 1029 (8th Cir. 2010) (guilty-plea voluntariness claims not cognizable on direct appeal when defendant failed to move to withdraw plea)
United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455 (8th Cir. 2009) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review)
United States v. Lazarski, 560 F.3d 731 (8th Cir. 2009) (when district court varies downward, it is unlikely to have abused discretion by not varying further)
United States v. Lane, [citation="23 F. App'x 596"] (8th Cir. 2001) (refusal to entertain withdrawn challenge to plea voluntariness)