United States v. Javier Toscano-Serrano
687 F. App'x 236
4th Cir.2017Background
- Defendant Javier Toscano-Serrano pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 846).
- The district court calculated an advisory Sentencing Guidelines range of 70–87 months and sentenced Toscano-Serrano to 72 months’ imprisonment.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues but questioned Rule 11 compliance and sentence reasonableness; the defendant filed no pro se brief and the Government declined to file an appellee brief.
- Because no motion to withdraw the plea was made below, the Fourth Circuit reviewed Rule 11 compliance for plain error and reviewed the sentence for procedural and substantive reasonableness under Gall.
- The Fourth Circuit concluded the district court substantially complied with Rule 11, the guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, and the within-Guidelines sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court complied with Rule 11 in accepting the guilty plea | (Toscano-Serrano) Alleged Rule 11 defects might render plea invalid | (Gov't) Plea complied with Rule 11; defendant pleaded knowingly and voluntarily | No plain error; substantial compliance with Rule 11; plea valid |
| Whether the 72-month within-Guidelines sentence was reasonable | (Toscano-Serrano) Sentence may be procedurally or substantively unreasonable | (Gov't) Guidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable and §3553(a) factors were considered | Sentence is procedurally and substantively reasonable; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedures for counsel to follow when asserting appeal is frivolous)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (standards for procedural and substantive reasonableness review of sentences)
- United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2002) (plain-error review when no motion to withdraw guilty plea was made)
- United States v. Muhammad, 478 F.3d 247 (4th Cir. 2007) (elements and discretion in plain-error review of plea proceedings)
- United States v. Dowell, 771 F.3d 162 (4th Cir. 2014) (presumption of substantive reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences)
- United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375 (4th Cir. 2006) (burden to rebut presumption of reasonableness using § 3553(a) factors)