Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
No. 15-4056
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
William L. Osteen,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:14-cr-00178-WO-2)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Keith
Darnell
Dillard,
Jr.,
pled
guilty
pursuant
to
(2012),
aggravated
identity
theft,
in
violation
of
filing
7206(2)
of
false
(2012).
tax
The
returns,
district
in
violation
court
of
imposed
an
26
U.S.C.
aggregate
court
plainly
erred
by
imposing
joint
and
several
Dillard
did
not
object
to
the
district
courts
United States v.
[W]e may reverse
only on a finding that (1) there was error, (2) that was plain,
(3) that affected substantial rights, and (4) that seriously
affected
the
fairness,
judicial proceedings.
integrity,
or
public
reputation
of
marks omitted).
2
Under
3663A
the
to
Mandatory
3664
(2012),
Victim
a
Restitution
sentencing
Act,
court
18 U.S.C.
must
order
F.3d
552,
554
3664(f)(1)(A)).
(4th
Cir.
2013)
(quoting
18
U.S.C.
to
the
victims
loss.
18
U.S.C.
3664(h).
offense
of
conviction
and
does
not
permit
victim
to
capped
at
$29,238.
Two
of
our
sister
circuits
have
order
courts discretion.
is
permissible
exercise
of
the
district
(1st Cir. 2001); United States v. Trigg, 119 F.3d 493, 501 (7th
3
Cir. 1997).
various
restitution
orders
does
not
exceed
the
victims
losses.
See United States v. Klein, 476 F.3d 111, 114 (2d Cir.
2007).
Thus,
plainly
err
we
in
conclude
ordering
that
the
restitution
district
to
be
court
joint
did
and
not
several
336, 342 (4th Cir. 2002) (In the absence of [Supreme Court or
Fourth Circuit] authority, decisions by other circuit courts of
appeals are pertinent to the question of whether an error is
plain. (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Dillard
further
argues
that
the
district
court
plainly
when
it
orally
ordered
Hairston
to
be
jointly
We agree.
and
It is
the
sentence
and
the
pronouncement controls.
written
judgment
conflict,
the
oral
accordance
with
Anders,
we
have
reviewed
the
entire
appeal.
Accordingly,
although
we
affirm
Dillards
is
restitution.
also
jointly
and
severally
liable
for
Dillards
but
counsel
that
such
petition
would
be
are
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.