United States v. Gary Mabe
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Pursuant to a written plea agreement with the government, Defendant-Appellant Gary Mabe pleaded guilty to conspiracy to utter counterfeit obligations or securities, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 472, and counterfeiting obligations or securities, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 471-472 . Mabe argues that the district court and his own lawyer improperly dissuaded various witnesses from testifying on his behalf during the sentencing hearing, that his lawyer was constitutionally ineffective as a result, and that the government breached the plea agreement. We have jurisdiction over Mabe’s appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
1. Regardless of whether we review for abuse of discretion or plain error, the district court did not err in stating that certain of Mabe’s proposed witnesses might incriminate themselves if they testified. Trial judges have discretion to warn witnesses about the risk of self-incrimination. United States v. Santiago-Becerril, 130 F.3d 11, 26 (1st Cir.1997); United States v. Harlin, 539 F.2d 679, 681 (9th Cir.1976). The district court was legally correct when it observed that Mabe’s witnesses might admit the…