US v. Oscar Mendoza

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cr-00083-NCT-2 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999904917].. [15-4626]

Appeal: 15-4626

Doc: 43

Filed: 08/05/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4626

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
OSCAR PAZ MENDOZA,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:15-cr-00083-NCT-2)

Submitted:

July 29, 2016

Decided:

August 5, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark A. Jones, BELL, DAVIS & PITT, PA, Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Randall Stuart Galyon, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED
STATES
ATTORNEY,
Greensboro,
North
Carolina,
for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-4626

Doc: 43

Filed: 08/05/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Oscar Paz Mendoza pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute
cocaine hydrochloride, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(C), 846 (2012).

The district court sentenced Mendoza to

109 months’ imprisonment, and he now appeals.

Appellate counsel

has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967),

questioning

pled guilty.

whether

Mendoza

knowingly

and

voluntarily

Mendoza was informed of his right to file a pro se

supplemental brief, but he has not done so.
Because Mendoza did not seek to withdraw his guilty plea,
we review the acceptance of his guilty plea for plain error.
United States v. Aplicano-Oyuela, 792 F.3d 416, 422 (4th Cir.
2015).

“In order to satisfy the plain error standard [Mendoza]

must show: (1) an error was made; (2) the error is plain; and
(3) the error affects substantial rights.”

United States v.

Massenburg, 564 F.3d 337, 342-343 (4th Cir. 2009).
reviewed

the

record

and

conclude

that

no

We have

reversible

error

occurred in the acceptance of Mendoza’s guilty plea, which was
knowing and voluntary.
In

accordance

with

Anders,

we

have

reviewed

the

entire

record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal.

We therefore affirm Mendoza’s conviction and sentence.

This court requires that counsel inform Mendoza, in writing, of
the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
2

Appeal: 15-4626

Doc: 43

further review.

Filed: 08/05/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

If Mendoza requests that a petition be filed,

but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,
then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from
representation.

Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on Mendoza.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3