SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(US)(ca4) 240

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
United States – Appellant
Versus
Juan Ortiz-Orellana – Respondent



PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4844

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JUAN ALBERTO ORTIZ-ORELLANA, a/k/a Chele, a/k/a Furia,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 16-4845

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MINOR PEREZ-CHACH, a/k/a Minor Chach-Perez, a/k/a Little Bad, a/k/a Bryant Sacarias,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. (8:13-cr-00496-RWT-2; 8:13-cr-00496-RWT-8)

Argued: September 19, 2023 Decided: January 10, 2024 _________________

Before KING, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judges. USCA4 Appeal: 16-4844 Doc: 188 Filed: 01/10/2024 Pg: 2 of 25

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by published opinion. Senior Judge Floyd wrote the opinion in which Judge King and Senior Judge Motz joined.

ARGUED: Manuel J. Retureta, RETURETA & WASSEM, PLLC, Washington, D.C.; Carmen D. Hernandez, LAW OFFICES OF CARMEN D. HERNANDEZ, Highland, Maryland, for Appellants. Sangita K. Rao, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Kenneth A. Polite, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Lisa H. Miller, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Thomas E. Booth, Appellate Section, Criminal Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Erek L. Barron, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, William D. Moomau, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 16-4844 Doc: 188 Filed: 01/10/2024 Pg: 3 of 25

FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge:

Defendants Ortiz-Orellana (“Ortiz”), Minor Perez-Chach (“Perez”) (collectively,

“Appellants”), and others, were convicted in 2016 by a jury of conspiracy under the

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) (Count

1), and murder in aid of racketeering in violation of the Violent Crimes in Aid of

Racketeering statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(1) (VICAR) (Count 6 and 8). Perez was also

convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, 18 U.S.C. §

922(g)(1) (Count 11); and being an alien in possession of a firearm and ammunition, 18

U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) (Count 12). Ortiz was also convicted of VICAR conspiracy to commit

murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5) (Count 7); discharging a firearm in

furtherance of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) (Count 9);

and murder resulting from the Section 924(c)(1) offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(j)

(Count 10).

Perez was sentenced to life imprisonment on Counts 1 and 6, and to 63 months’

imprisonment on Counts 11 and 12, all to run concurrently. Ortiz was sentenced to

concurrent terms of life imprisonment on Counts 1 and 8; a concurrent term of seven years

on Count 7; and a ten-year term on Count 9 and life term on Count 10, concurrent to each

other but consecutive to the other terms. Appellants Ortiz and Perez now ask that their

convictions be reversed, and their sentences vacated and remanded.

For the reasons that follow, we vacate

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top