Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-09-04027/USCOURTS-ca7-09-04027-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Shana Sain
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted March 17, 2010

Decided March 18, 2010

Before

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge

DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge

No. 09‐4027

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff‐Appellee,

v.

SHANA SAIN,

Defendant‐Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Southern District of Indiana,

Indianapolis Division.

No. 09 CR 00105

Larry J. McKinney,

Judge.

O R D E R

Shana Sain owned a transportation company that partnered with Indiana Medicaid

to provide services to eligible patients.  Over a two‐and‐a‐half‐year period, Sain overbilled

for her services, defrauding the agency of nearly a quarter of a million dollars.  She pleaded

guilty to health‐care fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1347, and, in her plea agreement, stipulated to an

offense level of 15 and waived the right to appeal her sentence as long as the district court

sentenced her within or below the advisory guideline range for that offense level.  Sain’s

criminal‐history category of IV produced a guidelines imprisonment range of 30 to 37

months, and the district court sentenced her to a 30‐month prison term.  Sain appeals

nonetheless, and her appointed counsel seeks to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), because he concludes that the appeal is frivolous.  Sain did not respond to

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

Case: 09-4027 Document: 10 Filed: 03/18/2010 Pages: 2
No. 09‐4027 Page 2

our invitation to comment on counsel’s motion.  See CIR. R. 51(b).  We limit our review to the

potential issues discussed in counsel’s facially adequate brief. See United States v. Schuh, 289

F.3d 968, 973‐74 (7th Cir. 2002).

Sain does not wish to have her guilty plea set aside, so counsel properly omits any

discussion of the voluntariness of her guilty plea or the adequacy of the plea colloquy.  See

United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 671 (7th Cir. 2002).  The appeal waiver stands or falls

with the plea, Nunez v. United States, 546 F.3d 450, 453 (7th Cir. 2008); United States v.

Whitlow, 287 F.3d 638, 640 (7th Cir. 2002), and Sain’s waiver precludes her from challenging

her within‐guidelines sentence.  Accordingly, we agree with counsel that any potential

arguments on appeal would be frivolous.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.

Case: 09-4027 Document: 10 Filed: 03/18/2010 Pages: 2