20-4142-cr (L) United States v. Daciann Dionne Brown UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 9th day of December, two thousand twenty-one. Present: GUIDO CALABRESI, DENNY CHIN, WILLIAM J. NARDINI, Circuit Judges, _____________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. 20-4142-cr, 20-4143-cr DACIANN DIONNE BROWN, AKA BRANDY LOVETTE WEBB, Defendant-Appellant. _____________________________________ For Appellee: Monica J. Richards, Assistant United States Attorney, for James P. Kennedy, Jr., United States Attorney, Western District of New York, Buffalo, NY For Defendant-Appellant: Scott M. Green, Law Office of Scott Green, Rochester, NY Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.). 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Defendant-Appellant Daciann Dionne Brown appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.) sentencing her principally to concurrent terms of 46 months of imprisonment on one count of wire fraud, 1 one count of making false claims, 2 one count of fraud related to identification documents, 3 and one count of failing to appear for sentencing. 4 We assume the reader’s familiarity with the record. On appeal, Brown argues that the district court committed three errors in connection with her sentencing by (1) applying a two-level enhancement to her offense level for obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1; (2) declining to apply a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. §3E1.1; and (3) failing to explain adequately its reasoning for declining to impose a non-Guidelines sentence. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the district court. I. Obstruction of Justice On May 9, 2018, Brown pled guilty to wire fraud, making a false claim, and fraud related to identification documents. The district court scheduled a sentencing hearing for August 28, 2018, but Brown failed to attend. She was arrested on June 3, 2020, and later pled guilty to one additional count of failing to appear. At her sentencing for all four offenses, the district court grouped all counts under U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2(c) and applied a two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 (“If . . . the defendant willfully …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals