Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 147 views

    United States v. Sergio Mujica, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Sergio Mujica pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. He received a 350-month sentence within federal guidelines. Mujica appealed his sentence. The appellate court reviewed his sentence and found it to be both procedurally and substantively reasonable. The court affirmed the district court's judgment and sentence. Mujica's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The appellate court conducted an independent review and also found no issues warranting appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Sergio Mujica, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    147 views4 pages
    Sergio Mujica pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. He received a 350-month sentence within federal guidelines. Mujica appealed his sentence. The appellate court reviewed his sentence and found it to be both procedurally and substantively reasonable. The court affirmed the district court's judgment and sentence. Mujica's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The appellate court conducted an independent review and also found no issues warranting appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-08-16 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-4866

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Sergio Mujica pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. He received a 350-month sentence within federal guidelines. Mujica appealed his sentence. The appellate court reviewed his sentence and found it to be both procedurally and substantively reasonable. The court affirmed the district court's judgment and sentence. Mujica's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The appellate court conducted an independent review and also found no issues warranting appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Sergio Mujica, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Sergio Mujica pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. He received a 350-month sentence within federal guidelines. Mujica appealed his sentence. The appellate court reviewed his sentence and found it to be both procedurally and substantively reasonable. The court affirmed the district court's judgment and sentence. Mujica's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The appellate court conducted an independent review and also found no issues warranting appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 4

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-4866

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    SERGIO MUJICA,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg.
    Samuel G. Wilson,
    District Judge. (5:09-cr-00015-sgw-1)

    Submitted:

    July 29, 2011

    Decided:

    August 16, 2011

    Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    John S. Hart, Jr., HART LAW OFFICES, Harrisonburg, Virginia, for


    Appellant.
    Craig Jon Jacobsen, I, Assistant United States
    Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Sergio Mujica pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute
    fifty grams or more of methamphetamine and 500 grams or more of
    a

    mixture

    or

    substance

    containing

    detectable

    amount

    methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C 846 (2006).

    of
    The

    district court imposed a 350-month within-Guidelines sentence.


    His attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
    386

    U.S.

    738

    (1967),

    stating

    that

    there

    are

    no

    meritorious

    issues for appeal but asking the court to review the district
    courts

    fact-finding

    supplemental brief.
    An

    at

    sentencing.

    Mujica

    filed

    appellate

    court

    reviews

    United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).


    of

    se

    We affirm.
    a

    sentence

    reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard.

    consideration

    pro

    both

    the

    reasonableness of a sentence.

    Gall v.

    This review requires

    procedural

    Id.

    for

    and

    substantive

    First, the court must assess

    whether the district court properly calculated the Guidelines

    Mujica asserts that the district court erroneously


    included three of his convictions in his criminal history
    calculation,
    improperly
    relied
    on
    hearsay
    evidence
    at
    sentencing, and that his guilty plea was involuntary.
    Our
    review of the record leads us to conclude that these claims lack
    merit.
    To the extent Mujica contends that counsel told him he
    could not prevail at trial and promised him a sentence of 120
    months or less, ineffective assistance of counsel claims are not
    cognizable here because the record does not conclusively
    establish a right to relief.
    United States v. Richardson, 195
    F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999).

    range,

    considered

    analyzed

    any

    the

    18

    arguments

    U.S.C.

    3553(a)

    presented

    by

    (2006)

    the

    sufficiently explained the selected sentence.

    factors,

    parties,

    and

    Id. at 49-50; see

    United States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d 572, 576 (4th Cir. 2010).

    The

    court also must consider the substantive reasonableness of the


    sentence, examin[ing] the totality of the circumstances to see
    whether the sentencing court abused its discretion in concluding
    that the sentence it chose satisfied the standards set forth in
    3553(a).
    (4th

    Cir.

    United States v. Mendoza-Mendoza, 597 F.3d 212, 216


    2010).

    After

    reviewing

    the

    record

    with

    these

    standards in mind, we conclude that Mujicas sentence is both


    procedurally and substantively reasonable.
    In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
    in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
    We therefore affirm the district courts judgment.

    This court

    requires that counsel inform Mujica, in writing, of the right to


    petition

    the

    Supreme

    review.

    If

    Mujica

    Court

    of

    requests

    the
    that

    United
    a

    States

    petition

    be

    for

    further

    filed,

    but

    counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then


    counsel

    may

    move

    representation.

    in

    this

    court

    for

    leave

    to

    withdraw

    from

    Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof

    was served on Mujica.

    We dispense with oral argument because

    the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

    materials

    before

    the

    court

    and

    argument

    would

    not

    aid

    the

    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like