Court Opinion

ID: 9780945
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 14:01:09.720178+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:34.714536
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-11733    Document: 37-1     Date Filed: 08/30/2023   Page: 1 of 4

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 22-11733
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       MICHAEL D. BEITER, JR.,

                                                  Defendant- Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Florida
                   D.C. Docket No. 0:11-cr-60273-WPD-2
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-11733         Document: 37-1        Date Filed: 08/30/2023         Page: 2 of 4

       2                         Opinion of the Court                       22-11733

       Before WILSON, BRANCH, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Michael Beiter, Jr., a federal prisoner proceeding pro se,
       appeals the district court’s order denying his second post-judgment
       motion to “correct the record” in his underlying criminal case. The
       government, in turn, has moved for summary affirmance, arguing
       that the appeal is frivolous. Beiter opposes the motion.
               Summary disposition is appropriate where “the position of
       one of the parties is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can
       be no substantial question as to the outcome of the case, or where,
       as is more frequently the case, the appeal is frivolous.” Groendyke
       Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). 1 An appeal
       is frivolous when the party is not entitled to relief because there is
       no basis in fact or law to support their position. See Bilal v. Driver,
       251 F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir. 2001) (“A claim is frivolous if it is
       without arguable merit either in law or fact.”).
              In 2013, a jury convicted Michael Beiter, Jr., of conspiracy to
       defraud the United States and multiple counts of false and fictious
       claims upon the United States, and he was sentenced to 300
       months’ imprisonment. Since then, Beiter has filed numerous
       post-judgment motions seeking to clarify or otherwise correct the

       1 See Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1207 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc)
       (holding that all decisions from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued prior
       to October 1, 1981, are binding precedent in the Eleventh Circuit).
USCA11 Case: 22-11733         Document: 37-1         Date Filed: 08/30/2023          Page: 3 of 4

       22-11733                   Opinion of the Court                                 3

       record. As relevant to this appeal, in May 2022, Beiter filed a
       “motion to correct the record” in which he sought to have the
       record in his case “corrected” to reflect that Beiter was never
       represented by the Federal Public Defender’s Office (“FPD”) in his
       underlying criminal case because he had “fired” FPD as counsel. 2
       The district court denied the motion. Beiter now appeals the
       district court’s ruling, arguing that the district court erred in
       denying his request to correct the record.
             Here, despite Beiter’s contentions to the contrary, the
       record reflects correctly that FPD represented Beiter as his court-
       appointed counsel during the underlying criminal proceedings
       from December 2011 to January 2012. 3 Therefore, Beiter’s appeal
       of the district court’s order denying his motion to correct the
       record is frivolous and the government’s motion for summary

       2 Beiter previously filed a similar motion in April 2022, which the district court
       denied.
       3 The record reflects that, at Beiter’s initial appearance in 2011, Beiter opposed
       the appointment of counsel but also stated that he would not be hiring counsel
       and that he would not be representing himself, so the magistrate judge
       appointed the FPD to represent him over his objection. And throughout the
       proceedings, Beiter repeatedly asserted that he “fired” FPD counsel, and the
       magistrate judge explained that “[f]or purposes of this Court’s record . . .
       regardless of how many times you fire him, he is appointed for these
       proceedings at this time.” Thus, while it is clear that Beiter disagreed with the
       court’s decision concerning counsel, from a legal standpoint, Beiter was in fact
       represented by the FPD during a portion of the underlying criminal case, and
       there is nothing to correct in the record. The record is legally accurate.
USCA11 Case: 22-11733         Document: 37-1         Date Filed: 08/30/2023          Page: 4 of 4

       4                          Opinion of the Court                        22-11733

       affirmance is GRANTED. 4 Groendyke Transp., Inc., 406 F.2d at
       1162.

       4 Beiter’s motion for this Court to hear this case as an initial matter en banc is
       DENIED.