United States v. Saad Basha
691 F. App'x 716
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Saad Subhi Basha pled guilty to (1) conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana (21 U.S.C. § 846) and (2) conspiracy to commit money laundering (18 U.S.C. § 1956(h)).
- Sentenced by the district court to 30 months’ imprisonment; appeal follows his convictions and sentence.
- Basha challenged his convictions on appeal, arguing (a) ineffective assistance of counsel by attorney Anthony Brooklier, (b) prosecutorial misconduct, and (c) sought leave to attach an extra document to the appellate record.
- The panel denied Basha’s motion to supplement the record because the proffered document did not fall within Rule 10(a) categories nor showed an omission/misstatement under Rule 10(e).
- The court reviewed ineffective-assistance claims under Strickland and noted such claims ordinarily must be raised in a § 2255 motion unless ineffective assistance conclusively appears on the face of the record.
- Because Basha did not raise prosecutorial misconduct in district court, the panel applied plain-error review and found no record support for either claimed error; the district court’s judgment was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counsel ineffective | Brooklier provided constitutionally deficient performance harming Basha | Performance was not deficient and no prejudice shown | Denied — record shows no conclusively apparent ineffectiveness; such claims better suited to § 2255 absent clear record evidence |
| Prosecutorial misconduct | Prosecutor committed improper acts that prejudiced substantial rights | No such misconduct; claim not raised below so plain-error review applies | Denied — no evidence in record of improper or prejudicial prosecutorial conduct |
| Supplement record | Court should permit attachment of extra document to appellate record | Document not part of Rule 10(a) and not shown to be omitted by error/accident | Denied — document does not fit Rule 10(a) or Rule 10(e) supplementation criteria |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-pronged test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
- United States v. Faulls, 821 F.3d 502 (4th Cir. 2016) (ineffective assistance claims not addressed on direct appeal unless clear on face of record)
- United States v. Caro, 597 F.3d 608 (4th Cir. 2010) (prosecutorial misconduct requires showing of improper conduct and prejudice to substantial rights)
- United States v. Alerre, 430 F.3d 681 (4th Cir. 2005) (plain-error standard applies where prosecutorial misconduct was not raised in district court)