Case: 19-12916 Date Filed: 08/17/2020 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-12916 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:16-cr-20519-JAL-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JAMES PETER SABATINO, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (August 17, 2020) Before WILSON, MARTIN, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: James Peter Sabatino is a federal prisoner subject to special detention conditions that restrict him to communicating with only a small number of people, namely his step-mother and current legal counsel. He appealed the district court’s Case: 19-12916 Date Filed: 08/17/2020 Page: 2 of 8 denial of his post-judgment motion to authorize him to communicate with his former attorney and paralegal. Because the district court has already granted the relief Sabatino seeks, we dismiss his appeal as moot. I. In 2017, Sabatino entered into a plea agreement and then pled guilty to conspiring to conduct a racketeering enterprise, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d). Under the terms of the agreement, the government would request that the district court and the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) impose certain communication restrictions on Sabatino during his incarceration. Sabatino agreed that those restrictions, also known as Special Administrative Measures, would prohibit him from communicating with anyone other than his attorney, Joseph S. Rosenbaum; Kimberly Acevedo, who was then a paralegal and is now an attorney; and his step-mother, Carol Fardette. Sabatino and the government agreed these restrictions would remain in place until “such time as when [Sabatino] demonstrate[s] his communications no longer pose a threat.” They also stipulated that the district court would “retain jurisdiction to consider any applications [to] modify these special conditions of confinement.” Following Sabatino’s change-of-plea hearing, and prior to sentencing, the government requested the district court restrict Sabatino’s communications, consistent with the plea agreement. At the sentencing hearing, the district court 2 Case: 19-12916 Date Filed: 08/17/2020 Page: 3 of 8 sentenced Sabatino to 240-months imprisonment and imposed the restrictions requested by the government. After the hearing, the district court issued a written order granting the government’s motion to impose communications restrictions. In July 2018, the Federal Public Defender requested the district court appoint substitute counsel to represent Sabatino on appeal due to a conflict. The district court granted the motion and appointed Ivy Ginsberg as Sabatino’s appellate counsel, pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act (“CJA”). Rosenbaum remained as Sabatino’s counsel in the district court. In October 2018, the district court granted Sabatino’s motion to modify his communications restrictions so he could communicate with Ginsberg about his appeal. The following month, Sabatino moved the district court to appoint Ginsberg as his attorney in district court as well, joining Rosenbaum. The court denied the motion, on the ground that two court-appointed attorneys were not needed to represent Sabatino in his district court proceedings. Sabatino filed a motion to reconsider which requested the district court appoint Ginsberg as his sole attorney in ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals