Case Explained: United States of America v. Steven Luepker

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-16 The eighth-circuit dismissed Steven Luepker’s appeal from his criminal sentence for a child pornography offense and granted his counsel’s motion to withdraw under *Anders v. California*. The court held that the defendant’s valid and enforceable appeal waiver, contained within his plea agreement, barred review of the substantive reasonableness of the sentence and the condition of supervised release prohibiting computer possession. Applying de novo review to the waiver’s validity and scope, the court determined that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice and that supervised release conditions are generally unreviewable when a valid waiver exists absent a constitutionally impermissible factor. After conducting an independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio*, the court found no non-frivolous issues falling outside the scope of the waiver, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and the termination of counsel’s representation. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.