Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-50109/USCOURTS-ca5-03-50109-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Gwendolyn A. Wheeler-McCammon
Appellant

Document Text:

*District Judge for the Western District of Louisiana, sitting

by designation.

**Pursuant to Fifth Circuit Rule 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determined that this opinion should not be published and is not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 Fifth

Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 17, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 03-50098 c/w

No. 03-50109

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ANNETTE FRANCES PATRICK and

GWENDOLYN A. WHEELER-McCAMMON,

Defendants - Appellants.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

Austin Division

_________________________________________________________________

Before JOLLY and WIENER, Circuit Judges, and WALTER, District

Judge.*

PER CURIAM:**

Annette Frances Patrick (“Patrick”) and Gwendolyn A. WheelerMcCammon (“Wheeler-McCammon”) each appeal 70-month sentences

imposed following guilty-plea convictions on a one-count bill of

information for theft, embezzlement, and misapplication of money

and funds of the Bank of America, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 656

 Case: 03-50109 Document: 0051430694 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2004
2

and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Specifically, Patrick and Wheeler-McCammon

challenge the district court’s application of a two-level

enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(12)(A) for deriving $1

million or more in gross receipts from a financial institution as

a result of the offense.

A sentence will be upheld unless it was imposed in violation

of law, was an incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines,

or is outside the range of the applicable sentencing guideline.

United States v. Ocana, 204 F.3d 585, 588 (5th Cir. 2000). This

court reviews the district court’s application of the Sentencing

Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. Id.

Under U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(12)(A), the offense level is to be

increased by two levels if “the defendant derived more than

$1,000,000 in gross receipts from one or more financial

institutions as a result of the offense.” The sentencing

guideline’s application notes make clear that, “[f]or the purpose

of subsection (b)(12)(A), the defendant shall be considered to have

derived more than $1,000,000 in gross receipts if the gross

receipts to the defendant individually, rather than to all

participants, exceeded $1,000,000." U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(12)(A) n.

9(A) (emphasis added). This commentary is authoritative “unless it

violates the Constitution, or a federal statute, or is inconsistent

with or a plainly erroneous reading of the guidelines.” United

 Case: 03-50109 Document: 0051430694 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2004
3

States v. Frazier, 53 F.3d 1105, 1112 (10th Cir. 1995) (citing

Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36, 42-45 (1993)). 

The burden of persuasion of enhancement is not a stringent

one. “The government must prove factors for enhancement of

sentencing by a preponderance of the evidence.” United States v.

Hill, 258 F.3d 355, 357 (5th Cir. 2001). This simply means that the

trier of fact must believe that the existence of a fact is more

probable than its nonexistence. Metropolitan Stevedore Co. v.

Rambo, 521 U.S. 121, 137 n. 9 (1997) (citing Concrete Pipe &

Products of Cal., Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for

Southern Cal., 508 U.S. 602, 622 (1993)). As earlier indicated, we

review findings of fact for clear error.

The defendants argue that the district court misapplied the

guidelines because there was insufficient evidence that each

defendant derived $1 million as a result of the offense.

Considering that the nature and complexity of the defendants’

scheme required the cooperation and joint efforts of both

defendants and that the defendants took equal risks, the district

court could reasonably believe that it was more likely than not

that each defendant derived more than $1 million as a result of the

offense. Over the course of the scheme $2,638,702 was taken from

the vaults of Bank of America. Wheeler-McCammon’s vault was

missing approximately $1,300,000, Patrick’s was missing

approximately $450,000, and the origin of approximately $850,000 is

 Case: 03-50109 Document: 0051430694 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/17/2004
4

unknown. As we have noted, the scheme required the knowledge and

cooperation of both defendants to be successful.

Although the audit of the conspiracy showed that most of the

money was missing from Wheeler-McCammon’s vault, Patrick, who was

Wheeler-McCammon’s supervisor, used her position as customer

service manager to cover Wheeler-McCammon’s thefts. Moreover, at

times when Patrick did not control a vault -- and was unable

personally to steal money -- Wheeler-McCammon would provide her

with a division of the money stolen by Wheeler-McCammon. In

schemes such as this, where the right hand necessarily knows what

the left is doing and the parties encounter equal risk, we cannot

say that the district court was clearly erroneous in concluding

that it was more likely than not that the proceeds were split on a

fairly equal basis. 

Accordingly, we find that the government sufficiently proved,

by a preponderance of the evidence, that both defendants derived at

least $1 million as a result of the offense. The district court’s

enhancement of the defendants’ sentences is, therefore, AFFIRMED.

 Case: 03-50109 Document: 0051430694 Page: 4 Date Filed: 02/17/2004