Case ID: f-appx_705/html/0190-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Abdi Razaq Abshir OSMAN, a/k/a Abdirasaq Abshir, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohamed Abdi Jama, a/k/a Mohammed Abdi Jamah, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abdicasiis Cabaase, a/k/a Ahmed Mahomood, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohamed Farah, a/k/a Mahamed Farraah Hassan, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-4754, No. 16-4756, No. 16-4758, No. 17-4274
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 17, 2017
    Decided: December 6, 2017
    Trey R. Kelleter, VANDEVENTER ’ BLACK LLP, Norfolk, Virginia; Jason Alan Dunn, JASON A. DUNN, PLC, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lawrence H. Woodward, Jr., SHUTTLEWORTH, RULOFF, SWAIN, HADDAD & MORECOCK, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia; Robert B. Rig-ney, PROTOGYROU & RIGNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellants. Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney, Richard D. Cooke, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before KING, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Abdi Razaq Abshir Osman, Mohamed Abdi Jama, Abdicasiis Cabaase, and Mohamed Farah (collectively, “Defendants”) appeal their convictions and life sentences for piracy, in violation 18 U.S.C. § 1651 (2012). We conclude that Defendants’ challenges to their convictions and life sentences are barred by the law-of-the-case doctrine because we previously considered and rejected Defendants’ arguments in United States v. Said, 798 F.3d 182, 198, 198-200 (4th Cir. 2015). See United States v. Aramony, 166 F.3d 655, 661 (4th Cir. 1999) (describing law-of-the-case doctrine and its exceptions). Accordingly, we affirm the amended judgments of the district court. 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 
      
       Defendants also were convicted of and sentenced for other offenses, but they do not challenge those convictions or sentences on appeal.