United States v. Plascencia-Orozco

Defendant, a citizen and national of Mexico, appealed his conviction of two counts of aggravated identity theft and two counts of attempted illegal reentry. The court concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's third request for new counsel; the district court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that defendant had breached the terms of his 2008 plea agreement by unlawfully returning to the United States in 2011; the district court did not err by ruling that defendant had breached his plea agreement at a pretrial motions-in-limine hearing; the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to submit the issue of breach to a jury; the district court did not err by allowing the government to reindict defendant on the 2008 charges without first seeking a judicial finding of breach; the district court did not err by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing sua sponte; the district court did not commit errors that cumulatively rendered defendant's trial fundamentally unfair; the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting into evidence a Mexican birth certificate that the government claimed belonged to defendant; the district court did not err by failing to hold a hearing on potential jury bias after defendant made an obscene gesture towards a juror; the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the government to elicit testimony about the witnesses' testimony in unrelated prior proceedings; the district court did not plainly err by allowing the government to question defendant about the credibility of a witness; the district court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing defendant to 184 months in prison; and the district court lacked authority to order defendant to use the name "Ramiro Plascencia-Orozco." Accordingly, the court vacated the district court's March 30, 2015 order. The court affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence. View "United States v. Plascencia-Orozco" on Justia Law