Opinion ID: 219744
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: introduction

Text: This case is before us on direct appeal after defendant Michael B. Jordan entered a plea agreement regarding a drug related charge and received a sentence of 210 months’ imprisonment. Mr. Jordan presents three issues on appeal. First, he argues that he “was After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. erroneously assessed a two level offense adjustment for obstruction of justice within the definition of Federal Sentencing Guideline § 3C1.1 for filing pleadings which had no legal effect but were deemed annoying by the trial court.” Aplt. Opening Br. at 2. Second, he asserts that his counsel was ineffective in failing to “effectively challenge the enhancement for obstruction of justice under the Federal Sentencing Guideline 3C1.1.” Id. at 10. Third, he argues that his guilty plea “was improvident and therefore involuntary because [he] did not admit each element of the crime.” Id. at 14. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742, we affirm.