United States v. Zhang Long , 295 F. App'x 114 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    __________
    No. 07-3613
    ___________
    United States of America,              *
    *
    Appellee,                        *
    *   Appeals from the United States
    v.                         *   District Court for the
    *   Northern District of Iowa.
    Zhang Jian Long, also known as         *
    Jianlong Zhang,                        *         [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.                       *
    ___________
    No. 07-3614
    ___________
    United States of America,              *
    *
    Appellee,                        *
    *
    v.                         *
    *
    Dongyan Huang, also known as           *
    Huang Dongyan,                         *
    *
    Appellant.                       *
    ___________
    Submitted: September 22, 2008
    Filed: October 7, 2008
    ___________
    Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Zhang Jian Long and Dongyan Huang appeal from their convictions, after
    pleading guilty, for violating, respectively, 
    18 U.S.C. § 2320
    (a) and 
    31 U.S.C. § 5324
    .
    They maintain that the district court1 erred in denying Mr. Zhang's motion to suppress
    his pretrial statements and failed in its constitutional and statutory duty to provide
    them with an adequate interpreter at various hearings relating to their case.
    As the government points out, however, the defendants in their written plea
    agreements waived their right to appeal, with certain exceptions. The defendants
    assert that their appeal should be allowed because the sentence is "unconstitutionally
    defective," one of the exceptions to their appeal waivers. The infirmity in the
    defendants' argument is that they point to no defect in the sentence: They maintain
    only that there was a constitutional defect in the proceedings that led up to the
    sentencing. The appeal is therefore barred unless the plea agreements and
    corresponding waivers were not knowing and voluntary, or a miscarriage of justice
    would occur if the waivers were enforced. See United States v. Andis, 
    333 F.3d 886
    ,
    889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
    The defendants do not maintain that they did not understand the appeal waiver
    or any other part of their plea agreements, which they initialed at the beginning of
    each paragraph and signed at the bottom. And after a careful review of the record, we
    conclude that the district court conducted the proceedings with a conscientious
    1
    The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern
    District of Iowa.
    -2-
    regard for defendants' rights and that therefore the enforcement of the waiver could
    not result in a miscarriage of justice.
    Accordingly, we dismiss the defendants' appeals.
    ______________________________
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-3613

Citation Numbers: 295 F. App'x 114

Filed Date: 10/7/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023