Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-03243/USCOURTS-ca10-89-03243-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Donald George Hoffman
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

• 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

FI ED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tench Circuit 

OCT 9 1QQO 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 89-3243 

(D.C. No. 89-20020-01) 

( D. Kan.) 

DONALD GEORGE HOFFMAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY and SETH, Circuit Judges, and KANE, District Judge**· 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); Tenth Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

An information was filed against the defendant on three 

counts on March 15 for making and possessing counterfeit 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

**Honorable John L. Kane, Jr., United States District Judge for 

the District of Colorado, sitting by designation. 

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 1 
obligations of the United States in violation of 18 u.s.c. §§ 471, 

472 and 474. He was tried and convicted on all counts. 

On this appeal the defendant urges as error the trial court's 

denial of a motion for continuance in order to obtain an expert 

witness. He also argues that there was insufficient evidence, 

that the jury was not properly instructed on what constituted a 

"plate" in Count III, and whether the Sentencing Guidelines were 

applied correctly. 

There was no evidence that defendant passed or attempted to 

pass any counterfeit currency. 

We find no error in the trial court's denial of a 

continuance. There was no showing that defendant's substantial 

rights were prejudiced, United States v. Jones, 730 F.2d 593 (10th 

Cir.), and no manifest injustice resulted. United States v. 

Wilks, 629 F.2d 669 (10th Cir.). The information was filed on 

March 15 and a public defender was initially appointed to 

represent the defendant and a trial date of May 15 was set. This 

attorney representing the defendant was allowed to withdraw and 

retained counsel entered his appearance on May 26 after a motion 

for continuance had been granted as to May 15. On June 5 and 

June 14 motions for continuance of the trial date were filed, and 

were denied. A motion was also made and denied on the date trial 

began which was June 19. The jury verdict was announced on 

June 21. The defendant, on this point, relies on United States v. 

Rivera, 837 F.2d 906 (10th Cir.). 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 2 
The motions for continuance which were made before the trial 

day stated that a "forensic document examiner" could not be 

obtained, but did not state what such a witness could testify to 

nor how the testimony could aid the defense. The purpose stated 

for the expert testimony stated in the oral motion on the day of 

trial were conclusions relating to the appearance of the notes in 

issue, and were really matters to be decided by the jury. 

We conclude that there was no error in the denial of the 

motions for continuance as presented to the trial judge and as 

tested against Rivera, Jones and Wilks. 

The record demonstrates that there was sufficient evidence to 

support a conviction on each count when the written confession of 

defendant is considered with the testimony of the witnesses, 

including the defendant. 

The instructions when considered as a whole were sufficient. 

There were no specific instructions as to what constituted a 

"plate" in Count III, but, everything considered, none was 

necessary. United States v. Cardall, 885 F.2d 656 (10th Cir.). 

We must conclude that the convictions must stand. 

As to the sentencing issues the defendant, a first-time 

offender, urges that the Sentencing Guidelines were not correctly 

applied. The base offense level for the violations was nine. The 

trial court made upward adjustments of six points under 

§ 2B5.l(b)(2) for specific offense characteristics, and two points 

more for obstruction of justice. The total thus reached 17 and 

extended beyond certain considerations for probation. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 3 
The six-point upward adjustment was made under§ 2BS.l(b)(2) 

which reads with Note 2: 

"If the defendant manufactured or produced any 

counterfeit obligation or security of the 

United States, or possessed or had custody of 

or control over a counterfeiting device or 

materials used in counterfeiting, and the 

offense level as determined above is less than 

15, increase to 15." 

Application Note 2 (as then applicable): 

"Subsection (b)(2) does not apply to persons 

who merely photocopy notes, paste corners of 

notes on notes of a different denomination, or 

otherwise produce items that are so obviously 

counterfeit that they are unlikely to be 

accepted even if subjected to only minimal 

scrutiny." 

Section 2B5.l(b)(l) relates to the face value of the counterfeit 

obligations. Under that subsection the offense level was under 

15. 

Counts I and II were directed to several black and white 

copies of United States currency made on a Xerox machine. 

Defendant had marked them with a green pencil to improve their 

appearance and treated them with fabric softener to change the 

feel of the paper. He urges that the bills were still obviously 

counterfeit and thus he would apply not§ 2BS.l(b)(2) but instead 

the offense level should be under§ 2BS.l(a). See above quote. 

The record shows however that the notes were "passable," and 

this was not contested by defendant. It is also significant that, 

as mentioned, the paper was treated to "improve" its feel and thus 

to better resemble genuine bills. 

-4-

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 4 
As to Count III, the preparation and possession of the 

"plates" by defendant was established. The plates were not etched 

and thus not ready for use on a printing press. The plates were 

prepared on special machines procured by defendant for use in the 

printing process. They were obviously "plates" as the term is 

used in the statute as the record shows although not then "etched" 

to separate for the colors. The purchase of the machinery by the 

defendant for cash, using a false name, and providing no address, 

all acts of defendant in preparation for the offenses, acts during 

the commission of the offense, and in "furtherance" of the 

offense, can be evaluated under§ 1B1.3(a)(l). 

As mentioned, the sentence was also adjusted upward two 

points for obstruction of justice under§ 3Cl.1 on the ground 

defendant had made untruthful statements or had testified 

untruthfully as to material facts. The trial court in making the 

two-point upward adjustment for obstruction did not refer to any 

particular false statements nor make a general reference to false 

statements. No factual determination was made or stated. The 

court did not refer to paragraphs 17 or 93 of the PSI which stated 

only a conclusion based on the jury's verdict as no other basis or 

source of information appears other than reference to allegations 

and feelings. Paragraph 17 states, in part: 

"Adjustment for Obstruction of Justice 

"17. Section 3Cl.1 ..• forms the basis for 

an increase of the offense level by two 

levels. The United States Attorney's Office 

has noted that Hoffman testified at his trial 

and the jury found, in its verdict, that he 

-5-

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 5 
lied. The United States Attorney alleges that 

he went beyond a mere denial of his guilt and 

told various false stories in an attempt to 

cover his guilt. The United States Attorney 

and Secret Service agents feel that his 

explanations for copying the front and back of 

federal reserve notes, using various 

combinations of substances to get the feel and 

tint of a real bill and his use of pattern 

notes are completely untrue and that he has 

willfully impeded or obstructed the 

administration of justice and his offense 

level should be increased by two levels." 

(Emphasis added.) 

In paragraph 93, after the objections to the PSI, it is stated by 

its writer: 

"The writer recognizes that in applying the 

provision for Obstruction of Justice, the 

defendant's testimony and statements should be 

evaluated in a light most favorable to the 

defendant; however, the writer believes that 

the jury's verdict reflected their belief that 

he had testified untruthfully concerning 

material facts during his trial. The writer 

believes that he wilfully impeded or 

obstructed the administration of justice and 

his offense level should be increased by two 

levels." 

The court did not adopt as findings of the court the paragraphs of 

the PSI referring to the matter (paragraphs 17 or 93 quoted above) 

as it did other paragraphs. The court in its closing statement 

said: "The Court finds that the presentence investigation report 

is correct and the previously stated findings are accurate," and 

adopts those findings. 

False testimony adjustments, if they concern defendant's 

testimony at trial, as they apparently did here, must be most 

carefully examined because of the obvious constitutional 

implications. The conclusion reached by the PSI seems to be that 

-6-

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 6 
if the defendant testifies, and he is convicted, it is proof that 

he lied. This has simplicity to recommend it, but it obviously 

cannot be. Since the trial court did not state any reasons, as 

required by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c), for its upward adjustment, we are 

left with the PSI based on the United States Attorney's 

allegations, on the Secret Service agents' feeling, and because 

the jury convicted the defendant we must remand. 

The judgment of the trial court on the jury verdict is 

AFFIRMED; however, the case is REMANDED for resentencing as above 

stated. IT IS SO ORDERED. 

-7-

Entered for the Court 

Oliver Seth 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-3243 Document: 010110059539 Date Filed: 10/09/1990 Page: 7