*1 Before RILEY, ARNOLD, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Roy Noles directly appeals the sentence the district court imposed after he pled ^[1] guilty to a firearm offense, pursuant to a plea agreement that contained an appeal *2 waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning the reasonableness of Noles’s sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable and applicable to the issue raised in this appeal. 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). In addition, we have independently reviewed the record, pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal outside the scope of the waiver.

We dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw. ______________________________

-2-

[1] The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.