PER CURIAM. Stephen Baker appeals from the sentence the District Court imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug-related offense under 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), arguing that the sentence is unreasonable. The government has moved to dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver. After review, we conclude that the waiver is valid, applicable, and enforceable. See United States v.
Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (reviewing de novo the validity and applicability of an appeal waiver); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.) (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 997, 124 S.Ct. 501, 157 L.Ed.2d 398 (2003). We have independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver.
Accordingly, we grant the government’s motion to dismiss this appeal based on the appeal waiver, and we grant counsel s motion to withdraw, . The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.