2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-12-2008 

# U SA v . B ielewic z P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 07-2880

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . B ie lewicz " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 118. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/118NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT
N o. 07- 2880
UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. SCOTT BI ELEW I CZ ,

A ppel l ant

A p p e a l f ro m th e O rd e r o f

th e U n ited S tate s D istric t C o u rt fort he W es t ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a ( D . C . C r i m . N o. 06- cr - 00044) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e D avi d St ew ar tC er cone Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL . A . R . 34. 1( a)

on N ovember 20, 2008

____________ B efor e: FU E N T E S, H A R D I M A N , and G A R T H , C i r cui tJ udges

(F il ed : D ec em b er 1 2 , 2 0 0 8 )

OP I NI ON
FU E N T E S, C i r cui tJ udge: 

### Sc ott Bi e l e wi c za

ppe a l s fr om

hi s 18- m onth s e nt e nc e fol l owi ng agui l ty pl e afor bank fr aud. He wa s r e l e a s e d fr om c us t ody on Augus t

9, 2008, at

whi c h t i m e he be gan a2



### fo ur-year period o f sup er vise d rel ea se . The go vernm ent c on te nd s that Bie le wiczwaived his right to appealthe s ente ncing iss ues he now ra is es and that, in any event, the Dis tric t Co ur t pr op e r l y c a l c ul at e d h i s s e nt e nc e andthe s e nt e nc e wa s r e a s on abl e . Be c aus e we co n clu d e th at B ielew icz kn o w in g ly an dv o lun tarily

w aiv edh is rig h t to ap p eal h is
sen ten ce, w e w ill d ism iss B ielew icz’s ap p eal. Biel ewic z i s no lon ger i ncar ce rate d. Th er efore, we m ust fir st examine whether

we have juri sdic ti onov er

Biel ewic z’ s a

pp ea l und er

Arti cl e I IIof

the Unite d S tate s Cons t i t ut i on, whi c h e xt e nds jur i s di c t i on onl y t o a c t ua lc a s e s or

c ontr ove r s i e s . U. S. C O N ST 

### . A RT 

### . I I I , § 2; Spe nc e r v. Ke mna , 523 U. S. 1, 7 ( 1998)
. I n Uni t e d St at e s v. J a c ks on, we he l d that

“ [a ] de fe ndant

who i s s e rvi ng at e rm

of s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e and chal le ng es on ly

his c om plet ed se ntence of

im pris on m ent m

ust s ho w collate ra l
co n sequ en ces” to p resen t a liv e case o r co n tro v ersy . 5 2 3 F .3 d2 3 4 , 2 4 1 (3 dC ir. 2 0 0 8 ). I n J a c ks on, we he l d that

c ol l at e r a lc ons e que nc e s i nc lude “ the pos s ibi l i ty of ac r e di t

for im prop er im pris on m ent a gainst

a t er m of supervis ed re le as e. ” I d. Beca use Bie le wicz arg u es th at h is sen ten ce w as unreaso n ab ly lo n g , w h ichco u ldresu lt ina cred it ag ain st h is term o f sup erv isedrelease, w e co n clu d e th at th is case is n o t m o o t. W e m us t now de t e rm i ne whe the r

Bi e l e wi c zwa i ve d hi s r i ght t o a ppe a lthe
re as on able ness of

his s ente nce by

ente ri ng into his ple a a gree m ent, wh ic h con ta ined expres s l angu age that prohibits Biel ewic z from appeal ing h is se ntence , with two li m it ed
ex cep tio n s. T h o se ex cep tio n s ap p ly o n ly if h is sen ten ce eith er ex ceed edth e ap p licab le3



### statuto ry lim its set f

o rthinth e U n itedS tates C o d e, o r if th e sen ten ce unreaso n ab ly
exce eded the guideli ne rang e det er m ined by the Dis tric t Court

un der the Un it ed Stat es S en ten cin g G u id elin es. I f w e det er m i ne thatB i el ew i cz’ s w ai verw as know i ng and vol unt ary , and t hatnei t herof t he exc ept i ons appl y , w e ca n decl i ne t o exer ci s e our juri sd ict ion o v er the ap p ea l. U n it ed S tat es v . G w inn ett , 4 8 3 F . 3 d 2 0 0 , 2 0 3 (3d C ir
. 2 0 0 7 );
s e e a ls o J a c k s o n , 5 2 3 F .3 d a t 2 4 2 . O n D e c e m b e r 5 , 2 0 0 6 , B iele w icz a p p e a re d a t a h e a rin g in th e D istric t C o u rt to pl ead gui l t yt o countone of the i ndi ct m ent . H e agr eed t o t he fa ctual bas i s of countone, bank fr aud, and he a l s o acknow l edged r es pons i bi l i t yfort he r emai ni ng count s i n t he in d ic tm e n t. T he D i s t r i ctC our tt hen r evi ew ed the t er m s of t he pl ea a gr eement , and expl ai ned t hem i n t hei rent i r etyt o B i el ew i cz, i ncl udi ng the w ai verand i t s exce pt i ons . T he D i s t r i ct C o u rt a sk e d B iele w icz if h e u n d e rsto o d a n d a g re e d to th e ter m s o f th e p lea a g re e m e n t, and B i el ew i cz r es ponded af fi r m at i vel y . T he D i s t r i ctC our tt hen as ked B i el ew i cz i f he ent er ed the pl ea vol unt ar i l y , fr ee of coer ci on and i nt i m i dat i on. B i el ew i cz c onfi r m ed that he en t ered t he ag reem ent of his ow n free w i l l becau se he be l i eved i tw as i n h i s best i nt er es tt o do s o. T he D i s t r i ctC our tconcl uded thatB i el ew i cz w as compet entand under s t ood hi s r i ght s and pot ent i al penal t i es , and thathe made a “know i ng, vol unt aryand i nfor m ed dec i s i on t o ent era gui l t ypl ea” t o t he cha r ge of ba nk fr aud. A ft erexami ni ng t he
r ecor d of t he pl ea c ol l oquy , w e ar e s at i s fi ed thatB i el ew i cz unde r s t ood t he cons equenc esB eca us e w e di s m i s s t he appe al bas ed on B i el ew i cz’ s w ai ver , w e nee d notaddr es s t he 1 o th e r iss u e s h e ra ise s o n a p p e a l. 4 o f h is p le a a g re e m e n t, a n d th a t h is d e c is io n to p le a d g u ilty w a s k n o w in g a n d v o lu n ta ry. W e fur t herconcl ude thatnei t herof t he exc ept i ons l i s t ed i n t he pl ea a gr eement appl y . B i el ew i cz r ece i ved a s ent ence of 18 m ont hs , w hi ch i s att he bot t om of t he gui del i ne r ange e s t abl i s hed byt he D i s t r i ctC our t . I n addi t i on, t he s ent ence does notrun afoul of s t atut or yl i m i t s . B eca us e w e fi nd t hatB i el ew i cz w ai ved hi s r i ghtt o appea l t he
reas on ableness of hi s sent ence, w e w i l l decli ne to exerci se j uri sdi ct i on and w i l l dis m i ss th e a p p e a l. 1