Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02653/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02653-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Debra J. Stephenson
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2653

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Debra J. Stephenson, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: June 29, 2007

 Filed: July 5, 2007

___________

Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Debra J. Stephenson appeals the 21-month prison sentence imposed by the

district court1

 after she pleaded guilty to mail fraud based on her embezzlement of

funds from her employer’s check-cashing and short-term-loan business. In calculating

Stephenson’s advisory Guidelines range, the district court applied enhancements for

obstruction of justice and use of a minor. Stephenson challenges the application of

both enhancements. Following our review of the district court’s application of the

Guidelines de novo, and the court’s factual findings for clear error, see United States

Appellate Case: 06-2653 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/05/2007 Entry ID: 3326186
-2-

v. Winters, 411 F.3d 967, 972 (8th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 1386 (2006),

we affirm.

We find no error in the district court’s application of the challenged

enhancements. During a meeting with her employer and a sheriff’s deputy to discuss

money that was missing from her employer’s business, Stephenson denied taking the

money, and instead encouraged her 16-year-old daughter--whom Stephenson brought

to the meeting--to admit that she had taken the money. See U.S.S.G. §§ 3B1.4 &

comment. (n.1) (requiring 2-level enhancement where defendant used or attempted to

use person less than age 18 to assist in avoiding detection of or apprehension for

offense; “‘use or attempted to use’ includes directing, commanding, encouraging,

intimidating, counseling, training, procuring, recruiting, or soliciting”), 3C1.1 &

comment. (nn.4(g) & 6) (requiring 2-level enhancement where defendant willfully

obstructed or impeded, or attempted to obstruct or impede, administration of justice

with respect to offense and any relevant conduct; adjustment applies if defendant

provides materially false statement to law enforcement officer that significantly

obstructed official investigation; materially false statement is one which, “if believed,

would tend to influence or affect the issue under determination”).

We reject Stephenson’s argument that the court engaged in impermissible

double-counting by applying both enhancements, because each served a separate

purpose under the Guidelines: the obstruction-of-justice enhancement did not take

into account that a minor was used to commit the obstructive conduct. See United

States v. Reichow, 416 F.3d 802, 806 (8th Cir.) (impermissible double counting

occurs where one part of Guidelines is applied to increase punishment on account of

harm fully accounted for by another part of Guidelines), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 784

(2005); cf. United States v. Joiner, 418 F.3d 863, 870 (8th Cir. 2005) (obstruction-ofjustice enhancement did not take into account victim’s official status, and thus 

Appellate Case: 06-2653 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/05/2007 Entry ID: 3326186
-3-

assessing additional 3-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(a) (official

victim) was not double-counting).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-2653 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/05/2007 Entry ID: 3326186