United States v. Agajani

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 22, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-40529
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SALEEM AGAJANI,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:97-CR-56-2
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Saleem Agajani appeals the 33-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction of conspiracy to commit
fraud in connection with access devices in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1029(b)(2). As his sole ground for appeal, he asserts that the
district court erred in applying the 1995 version of the United
States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”) manual, which was in
effect on the date of the offense, rather than the 2001 version.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-40529
-2-
Agajani did not object to the use of the 1995 guidelines; we
therefore review his argument under the plain-error standard.
See United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir.
1994)(en banc) (citing United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731-
37 (1993)).
Agajani has not demonstrated plain error in connection with
his sentence. Although he could have received the same 33-month
sentence under either version of the sentencing guidelines,
application of the 2001 version would have exposed him to a
higher sentencing range because Agajani’s offense involved
possession of device-making equipment and his offense level would
have been higher. Compare U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1 (1995) with § 2B1.1
(2001); see United States v. Kimler, 167 F.3d 889, 893 (5th Cir.
1999).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --