2004 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 2-2-2004 

# U S A v . Lop e z F alcone 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 . 03-1247

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004

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 sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2004 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 sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

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

w . v i l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . L opez F alc one " (2004). 2004 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1035. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004/1035NOT PRE CEDENT IAL THE UN ITED STATES CO URT OF AP PEA LS F OR TH E TH IRD CIR CU IT

___________ No. 03-1247

___________ UNITED S TATES OF AMERI CA

vs. JUAN ANTONIO LOPEZ FALCONE, Appellant

___________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNI TED STATES DIST RICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY (D.C. Crimi nal No. 00-cr -00190-4) Distri ct Judge: The Honorable Kathari ne S. Hayden

___________ Submitte d Under Third Circ uit LAR 34.1(a) on January26, 2004. BE FO RE : NY GA AR D, F UE NT ES , and ST AP LE TO N, Circu it Judges .

(Fil ed : February 2, 2004)

___________ OPINI ON OF THE COURT

___________ NY GA AR D, Circu it Judge .

Appellant , Juan Antoni o Lopez-Falcone, pleaded gui lty to fil ing fraudul ent claim s to M edica re, a vio lation o f 18 U.S .C. § 3 71. L opez -Falco ne w as sen tence d tothree y ears pr obation, and was ordered t o pay resti tuti on in the amount of $46,872. 00. A notice of appealwas timely file d and we appointed J ames C. Patt on, Esq. to represent t

he Appellant . Counsel ha s fil ed a brie f pursuant to And ers v. C aliforn ia , 386 U.S . 738, 8 7 S.C t. 1396 (196 7), ask ing this cour t to allow him to with draw beca use h e is unable t o identi fy any

non-fri volous i ssues for our revi ew. Lopez-Falconedid not fi le a pro se bri ef. The Distri ct Court ha d juri sdiction under 18 U.S. C. § 3231. We have juri sdiction under 28 U.S. C. § 1291. We will gr ant counsel ’s moti on to withdr aw and affirm the District Court ’s judgment of sentenc e. As is requ ired under Anders , Lop ez-F alcon e’s co unse l directed us to porti ons of the record that might arguably

support an appeal. Counsel pointed to one possibl e issue , namely , whether t he District Court

conducted a s uffici ently thorough pl ea hearing. The plea hearing conduct ed by t he District Court

complied wit

h Rule 11 of the F ede ral R ules of C rimi nal P roc edu re an d w as, th eref ore , suf ficie ntly tho rou gh. See Un ited Sta tes v. Ta nnis , 942 F.2d 196 ( 3d Cir. 1991) . The record refle cts t hat theDistri ct Court took eve ry opportuni ty to make cert ain that Lopez-Fal cone understood the char ges against him, and the right s he was forfeiting by pleading guil ty. The D istri ct Court also inform ed L opez -Falco ne of the m axim um pena lties he w ould face as a res ult of h is guilty plea .M oreo ver, the record in this m atter ref lects the Distric t Cou rt’s eff orts to

ensure that the re was an adequat e factualbasis f or Lopez-Fal cone’s gui lty plea by personally questioning him rega rding the fac ts of the case. Se e Fed.R .Crim.P. 11(f ).

Furthermore, our i ndependent r eview of the record satisfi es us that LopezFalcone’s sentence was legall y i mposed. The District Court correctl y determined the rang e und er the S enten cing G uidelin es an d stated , in detail, th e reaso ns fo r impo sing its sentence . In co nclus ion, be caus e Lo pez-F alcon e’s ple a pro ceed ing w as pro per an d his sentence legal , we will GRA NT counsel’s r equest to withdraw. I nasmuch as we find that the is sues rai sed in couns el’s brief are without merit, we will AFFIRM the judgment of senten ce en tered b y the Dis trict Co urt.

_________________________TO THE C LERK: Please fi le theforegoing opi nion.

/s/ Richard L. Ny gaard Circuit Judge