United States v. Hernandez-Velazquez

── United States v. Hernandez-Velazquez ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: May 29, 2026 Category: General 25-650 United States v. Hernandez-Velazquez UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 29th day of May, two thousand twenty-six. PRESENT: RICHARD J. SULLIVAN, EUNICE C. LEE, SARAH A. L. MERRIAM, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. No. 25-650 ERNESTO HERNANDEZ-VELAZQUEZ, a.k.a. Chapas, ARCELIA HERNANDEZ-VELAZQUEZ, a.k.a. La Gordis, HUGO HERNANDEZ- VELAZQUEZ, a.k.a. Norberto Hernandez Velasquez, a.k.a. La Gallina, Defendants, GIOVANNI HERNANDEZ-VELAZQUEZ, a.k.a. Giovanny Hernandez-Velasquez, a.k.a. Geovani Hernandez-Velasquez, Defendant-Appellant. * _____________________________________ For Defendant-Appellant: NICHOLAS D. SMITH, David B. Smith, PLLC, New York, NY. For Appellee: ERIN REID (Susan Corkery, on the brief), Assistant United States Attorneys, for Joseph Nocella, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY. Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (William F. Kuntz, II, Judge). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the appeal from the March 17, 2025 judgment of the district court is DISMISSED in part and the judgment is AFFIRMED in part. Giovanni Hernandez-Velazquez appeals from a judgment of conviction after his guilty plea to one count of sex trafficking conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591(a)(1)–(2), 1594(c), for which he was sentenced principally to 210 * The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to amend the caption as set forth above. 2 months’ imprisonment followed by five years’ supervised release. Hernandez- Velazquez raises two challenges to his sentence – first, that the district court erroneously relied on a victim-impact statement that was not made available to his counsel until the day before sentencing, without granting an adjournment to allow him to consult with counsel about it, and second, that the court wrongly concluded that his culpability was equal to that of his older brother. The government contends that Hernandez-Velazquez waived these arguments pursuant to the terms of the parties’ plea agreement. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues on appeal, to which we refer only as needed to explain our decision. “We review plea agreements, including waivers of the right to appeal, de novo and in accordance with general principles of the law of contract.” United States v.