United States v. Khazaee
15-3985-cr
| 2d Cir. | Oct 5, 2017Background
- Defendant Mozaffar Khazaee was indicted for interstate transportation of stolen property but pleaded guilty to a Substitute Information charging attempted export of defense articles to Iran in violation of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).
- District Court accepted Khazaee’s guilty plea and sentenced him to 97 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release.
- On appeal Khazaee challenged his conviction on three main bases: his plea was not knowing and voluntary (Rule 11), the court improperly participated in plea discussions (Rule 11(c)(1)), and he failed to admit all elements of the AECA offense (notably willfulness).
- The appellate court reviewed unpreserved Rule 11 claims for plain error, considering the entire record (plea agreement, stipulation, allocution, and government recitation at plea hearing).
- The record showed Khazaee’s admissions that he possessed export-controlled information without a license and arranged a shipment to Iran; he also acknowledged that exporting the information to Iran was illegal based on his training.
- The Second Circuit concluded the plea was knowing and voluntary, the court did not improperly participate in plea negotiations, and Khazaee admitted the willfulness element; the judgment was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Government) | Defendant's Argument (Khazaee) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 11 notice of charge / knowing & voluntary plea | Record (plea agreement, allocution, government statements) shows Khazaee understood he was pleading to AECA export offense | Khazaee thought he was pleading to §2314 (interstate transportation of stolen property) | Affirmed — no plain error; entire record supports knowing, voluntary plea |
| Court participation in plea discussions (Rule 11(c)(1)) | Court’s statements were procedural and did not advise, encourage, or pressure plea | Court improperly influenced plea and discussed sentencing benefits (3‑point reduction) to induce plea | Affirmed — no plain error; court did not coerce or improperly participate |
| Allocation to willfulness element of AECA | Khazaee admitted exports were illegal and that, from training, he knew exporting to Iran was illegal | Khazaee did not willfully violate AECA (lacked intent/knowledge of unlawfulness) | Affirmed — admissions satisfy willfulness requirement |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pattee, 820 F.3d 496 (2d Cir. 2016) (plain-error standard for unpreserved Rule 11 challenges)
- United States v. Maher, 108 F.3d 1513 (2d Cir. 1997) (court may consider entire record in reviewing plea validity)
- United States v. Torrellas, 455 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2006) (willfulness under AECA and effect of loose terminology in plea colloquy)
- United States v. Davila, 133 S. Ct. 2139 (2013) (prohibition on judicial participation in plea discussions)
- United States v. Werker, 535 F.2d 198 (2d Cir. 1976) (district court discussion of potential sentence and plea implications)
- United States v. Paul, 634 F.3d 668 (2d Cir. 2011) (judicial pressure to settle as improper participation)
- United States v. Hopkins, 53 F.3d 533 (2d Cir. 1995) (definition of willfulness as knowledge of wrongful or unlawful conduct)