Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 91 views

    United States v. Joseph Aniagyei, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion regarding Joseph Atta Aniagyei's appeal of his conviction and sentence. Aniagyei pled guilty to one count of misusing a social security number. As part of a plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(1)(C), the parties stipulated to an 11-month sentence, which the district court accepted. The appellate court affirmed Aniagyei's conviction, finding his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. The court dismissed the appeal of his sentence, as it was consistent with the stipulated plea agreement and is not reviewable under federal law.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Joseph Aniagyei, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    91 views4 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion regarding Joseph Atta Aniagyei's appeal of his conviction and sentence. Aniagyei pled guilty to one count of misusing a social security number. As part of a plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(1)(C), the parties stipulated to an 11-month sentence, which the district court accepted. The appellate court affirmed Aniagyei's conviction, finding his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. The court dismissed the appeal of his sentence, as it was consistent with the stipulated plea agreement and is not reviewable under federal law.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-09-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-4901

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion regarding Joseph Atta Aniagyei's appeal of his conviction and sentence. Aniagyei pled guilty to one count of misusing a social security number. As part of a plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(1)(C), the parties stipulated to an 11-month sentence, which the district court accepted. The appellate court affirmed Aniagyei's conviction, finding his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. The court dismissed the appeal of his sentence, as it was consistent with the stipulated plea agreement and is not reviewable under federal law.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    91 views4 pages

    United States v. Joseph Aniagyei, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion regarding Joseph Atta Aniagyei's appeal of his conviction and sentence. Aniagyei pled guilty to one count of misusing a social security number. As part of a plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(1)(C), the parties stipulated to an 11-month sentence, which the district court accepted. The appellate court affirmed Aniagyei's conviction, finding his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. The court dismissed the appeal of his sentence, as it was consistent with the stipulated plea agreement and is not reviewable under federal law.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-4901

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    JOSEPH ATTA ANIAGYEI,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
    (8:13-cr-00020-RWT-1)

    Submitted:

    September 25, 2014

    Decided:

    September 29, 2014

    Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam


    opinion.

    Bruce A. Johnson, Jr., LAW OFFICE OF BRUCE A. JOHNSON, JR., LLC,


    Bowie, Maryland, for Appellant.
    Paul Nitze, OFFICE OF THE
    UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Pursuant to his written plea agreement, Joseph Atta
    Aniagyei pled guilty to misusing a social security number, in
    violation

    of

    negotiated

    42

    an

    U.S.C.

    408(a)(7)(B)

    agreement

    pursuant

    (2012).

    to

    Fed.

    Aniagyei
    R.

    Crim.

    had
    P.

    11(c)(1)(C), in which the parties stipulated that an elevenmonth sentence was appropriate.

    After reviewing the presentence

    report, the court accepted the plea and imposed the stipulated
    sentence.

    This appeal timely followed.


    Aniagyeis

    counsel

    has

    filed

    brief

    pursuant

    to

    Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), averring that there


    are

    no

    meritorious

    appellate

    issues

    Aniagyeis plea was not knowingly entered.

    but

    suggesting

    that

    Although advised of

    his right to do so, Aniagyei has not filed a supplemental brief.


    The Government has not filed a response.

    Finding no error, we

    affirm in part and dismiss in part.


    Where, as here, a defendant has not moved to withdraw
    his guilty plea, we review his Rule 11 hearing for plain error.
    United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002).
    The record reflects that the district court fully complied with
    the mandates of Rule 11, ensuring that Aniagyeis guilty plea
    was knowing and voluntary and supported by an independent basis
    in fact.

    We therefore affirm Aniagyeis conviction.

    To the extent that this Anders appeal would require us


    to

    review

    Aniagyeis

    sentence,

    we

    note

    that

    it

    pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement.

    was

    imposed

    As the Tenth

    Circuit has explained, the federal statute governing appellate


    review

    of

    sentence,

    see

    18

    U.S.C.

    3742(a),

    (c)

    (2012),

    limits the circumstances under which a defendant may appeal a


    sentence

    to

    agreement

    which

    to

    he

    claims

    stipulated
    that

    his

    in

    Rule

    sentence

    11(c)(1)(C)

    was

    (1)

    plea

    imposed

    in

    violation of the law, (2) imposed as a result of an incorrect


    application

    of

    the

    Guidelines,

    or

    (3)

    is

    greater

    sentence set forth in the plea agreement.

    the

    United States v.

    Calderon, 428 F.3d 928, 932 (10th Cir. 2005).


    exceptions apply here.

    than

    None of these

    Aniagyeis sentence was less than the

    applicable statutory maximum of five years imprisonment, see 42


    U.S.C.

    408(a)

    (2012),

    and

    was

    precisely

    Government agreed was appropriate.


    not

    imposed

    Sentencing
    agreement

    as

    result

    Guidelines

    Guidelines.

    not

    on

    of

    because
    the

    an
    it

    district

    what

    he

    and

    the

    Moreover, the sentence was

    incorrect
    was

    application

    based

    courts

    on

    the

    calculation

    of

    the

    parties
    of

    the

    See United States v. Brown, 653 F.3d 337, 33940

    (4th Cir. 2011); United States v. Cieslowski, 410 F.3d 353, 364
    (7th Cir. 2005).

    Accordingly, review of Aniagyeis sentence is

    precluded by 3742(c)(1).

    In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire


    record and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.

    We

    therefore affirm Aniagyeis conviction and dismiss this appeal


    as to his sentence.

    This court requires that counsel inform

    Aniagyei, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court


    of the United States for further review.
    that

    petition

    be

    filed,

    but

    counsel

    If Aniagyei requests
    believes

    that

    such

    petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court


    for leave to withdraw from representation.

    Counsels motion

    must state that a copy thereof was served on Aniagyei.


    dispense

    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    We

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED IN PART;
    DISMISSED IN PART

    You might also like