United States v. Sarah Heydari ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • Case: 19-11374     Document: 00515540643         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/25/2020
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Fifth Circuit                           United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    No. 19-11374                      August 25, 2020
    Summary Calendar                     Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    United States of America,
    Plaintiff—Appellee,
    versus
    Sarah Heydari,
    Defendant—Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:19-CR-163-1
    Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Costa, Circuit Judges.
    Per Curiam:*
    Sarah Heydari appeals her above-guidelines sentence of 41 months in
    prison that was imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy
    to possess 15 or more counterfeit or unauthorized access devices. According
    to Heydari, the presentence report (PSR) failed to comply with the disclosure
    *
    Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
    circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
    Case: 19-11374      Document: 00515540643           Page: 2     Date Filed: 08/25/2020
    No. 19-11374
    requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(d); in particular, she
    argues that a hypothetical guidelines range first presented at sentencing
    relied on facts not disclosed in the PSR.
    We review this argument for plain error because Heydari did not
    object on this basis in the district court. See United States v. Johnson, 
    956 F.3d 740
    , 743 (5th Cir. 2020). To establish plain error, she must show an error
    that is clear or obvious that affects her substantial rights. 
    Id.
     If Heydari
    satisfies the first three prongs, we have the discretion to correct the error, but
    only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of
    judicial proceedings. See 
    id.
    Here, the PSR complied with the requirements set forth in Rule 32(d).
    See FED. R. CRIM. P. 32(d). The hypothetical guidelines range calculated
    by the probation officer at the district court’s request was based on detailed
    facts previously set forth in the PSR indicating that Heydari’s residence was
    being used for illegal drug activity. Notably, the PSR specifically informed
    Heydari that these facts could warrant an upward departure. Because the
    drug-related conduct upon which the district court relied when imposing an
    above-guidelines sentence was disclosed to Heydari well before the
    sentencing hearing, she cannot establish error, plain or otherwise. See
    Johnson, 956 F.3d at 743, 746.
    Heydari’s sentence is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-11374

Filed Date: 8/26/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/26/2020