United States v. Assane Badiane

Case: 16-17209 Date Filed: 02/22/2018 Page: 1 of 15 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 16-17209 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:16-cr-20200-DMM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MAMADOU ASSANE BADIANE, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (February 22, 2018) Before MARCUS, FAY, and HULL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Mamadou Assane Badiane, a federal prisoner, appeals his conviction for aggravated identity theft, 18 U.S.C. § 1028A, and his sentences for making a false Case: 16-17209 Date Filed: 02/22/2018 Page: 2 of 15 statement in a U.S. passport application, 18 U.S.C. § 1542, and aggravated identity theft.1 This is a strange case. The government failed to conduct basic pretrial preparation, relying instead on Badiane pleading guilty. On the other hand, one could reasonably think Badiane was trying to game the system by telling those involved that he was going to plead guilty, firing his attorney, and filing a pro se motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds. Our duty is to decide the issues raised in this appeal based upon the record, the facts, and the law. This we shall do. On appeal, Badiane argues that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motions for a continuance and a new trial, and by admitting evidence of his prior bad acts under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). He also asserts that the government failed to introduce sufficient evidence to show that he knew the means of identification he used belonged to a real person. Finally, he argues that the district court erred in imposing two sentencing enhancements.2 Contrary to Badiane’s arguments, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion for a continuance or the motion for a new trial based on the belated disclosure of evidence, nor did it abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of his 1 Badiane does not appeal his conviction for making a false statement in a U.S. passport application. 2 Although Badiane also asserts that his sentence was substantively unreasonable, he does not present any arguments to this effect. His passing reference is insufficient to raise the issue for appellate review. Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 681 (11th Cir. 2014). 2 Case: 16-17209 Date Filed: 02/22/2018 Page: 3 of 15 prior passport applications. It also did not err in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, as the government presented ample evidence of guilt. Furthermore, the district court properly imposed the sentencing enhancements. Accordingly, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND In 2016, a grand jury returned an indictment charging Badiane with making a false statement in a U.S. passport application (Count 1) and aggravated identity theft (Count 2). On April 21, 2016, the government filed its first discovery response, which stated that “all evidence made available . . . for inspection . . . may be offered in the trial of this cause, under F.R.E. 404(b) or otherwise.” ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals