US v. Jonathan Nol-Terron, No. 12-4801 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4801 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JONATHAN NOL-TERRON, a/k/a Ariel Molina Hernandez, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:12-cr-00113-WO-2) Submitted: April 29, 2013 Decided: May 24, 2013 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Todd Allen Smith, LAW OFFICE OF TODD ALLEN SMITH, Graham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Michael F. Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jonathan pled guilty to Nol-Terron, possessing a/k/a five or Ariel more Molina false Hernandez, identification documents in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1028(a)(3), (b)(2)(B) (West 2000 & Supp. 2012), 18 U.S.C. § 2 (2006) (Count 4), and to illegal reentry of an aggravated felon in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) (2006) (Count 5). On appeal, Nol-Terron asks whether the district court erred at his sentencing hearing by ruling that the two offenses to which he pled guilty were not related counts under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual ( USSG ) § 3D1.2 (2011). have Nol-Terron argues that, because his two offenses should been grouped under two-level USSG § 3D1.2, multiple count he should received a adjustment § 3D1.4. not have under USSG For the reasons that follow, we affirm. Grouping decisions are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Pitts, 176 F.3d 239 (4th Cir. 1999). As The Sentencing Guidelines provide that if a defendant is convicted of multiple counts involving substantially the same harm, the counts shall be grouped together. USSG § 3D1.2. Counts implicate substantially the same harm when they involve the same victim and two or more acts or transactions connected by a common criminal objective or constituting scheme or plan. USSG § 3D1.2(b). found that there were two different 2 part of a common Here, the district court victims or goals to be protected, i.e. the immigration offense (Count 5) was intended to protect national borders whereas the identification offense (Count 4) was intended to protect society s integrity of various identification documents. interest in the (J.A. 81-82). We find no clear error in the district court s above finding. Pitts, 176 F.3d at 244. Accordingly, we affirm Nol-Terron s sentence. We dispense with oral argument as the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
