USA v. Michael Angelo Sexton

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 21-13898
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL ANGELO SEXTON,
a.k.a. Michaelangelo Sexton,
a.k.a. MikeGotit,
a.k.a. MikeGotti,
Defendant-Appellant.
USCA11 Case: 21-13898 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 21-13898
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 1:17-cr-20266-DPG-1
____________________
Before W ILSON, J ORDAN, and NEWSOM , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Sexton appeals his 90-month prison sentence for
possession of unauthorized access devices and aggravated identity
theft. His 90-month sentence was the result of a resentencing that
we ordered in Sexton’s prior appeal.
See United States v. Sexton,
No. 20-14220 (11th Cir. Apr. 9, 2021).
Sexton argues that the government breached a stipulation in
his plea agreement. That stipulation provided that the loss amount
for purposes of calculating Sexton’s guideline range would be $3.5
million. At Sexton’s resentencing hearing, he moved for a down-
ward variance. While he acknowledged that he had stipulated to a
loss amount of $3.5 million, he argued that “the actual loss amount
was $75,000.” The government countered that Sexton could have
been held responsible for a loss of more than $1 billion and that
“what the parties did in this case was they stipulated to another
number that was arguably more reasonable.” The government’s
remark, Sexton argues, breached the plea agreement’s stipulation
about the amount of loss.
USCA11 Case: 21-13898 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

21-13898 Opinion of the Court 3
We find no merit to that argument. Under the plea agree-
ment, the government explicitly “reserve[d] the right to inform the
Court and the probation office of all facts pertinent to the sentenc-
ing process.” That is all the government did when it argued that
Sexton could have been held responsible for a greater loss amount.
The government nonetheless fulfilled its promise to recommend
that the loss amount was $3.5 million for purposes of calculating
Sexton’s guideline range. Because the government did not breach
the plea agreement, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
USCA11 Case: 21-13898 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --