United States Court of Appeals

FortheSeventhCircuit

Chicago,Illinois60604

ArguedNovember10,2010

DecidedDecember23,2010

Before

RICHARDD.CUDAHY,CircuitJudge

DANIELA.MANION,CircuitJudge

DIANES.SYKES,CircuitJudge

No.101518

UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA,

PlaintiffAppellee,

v.

EDWARDBOSIRE,

DefendantAppellant.

AppealfromtheUnitedStatesDistrict

CourtfortheEasternDistrictofWisconsin.

No.09CR84

CharlesN.Clevert,Jr.,

ChiefJudge.

ORDER

EdwardBosirepleadedguiltytomailfraudandwassentencedto39months’

imprisonment.Onappealhearguesthatheshouldhavereceivedatwolevelreductionasa

minorparticipantinthefraud.Becausethedistrictcourtdidnotclearlyerrinrefusingthis

reduction,weaffirmthejudgment.

EdwardBosireandhiswife,AngelaMartinMulu,bothasylumrefugeesfromKenya,

engagedinafouryearfraudschemethattargetedseveralMidwestreligiouscommunities.

Thecouplerepresentedthemselvesassiblingsandtoldtheirvictimsthattheywere

homelessillegalimmigrantssufferingfromseriousmedicalconditionsincludingmalaria

andtuberculosis,andthattheyhadsignificantlegalbillsattendanttotheirimmigration

status.Duringthefouryearperiodcoveredbytheindictment,thecouplenettedover$1.1

millioninproceeds,including$815,000fromtheDiscalcedCarmeliteNunsofPewaukee,

NONPRECEDENTIALDISPOSITION

Tobecitedonlyinaccordancewith

Fed.R.App.P.32.1
No.101518 Page2

Wisconsin.Thoughthecouplesaidtheyneededthefundsforlegalandmedicalbillsand

tuition,theyusedthemoneytomaintaintwoapartmentsandgambledawaynearly$1

million.

InMarch2009,thecouplewaschargedwithmailfraudunder18U.S.C.§1341.

Bosirepleadedguiltypursuanttoawrittenpleaagreement,andconcededthattherelevant

conductatsentencingshouldincludethetotalproceedsofthefraud.Theprobationofficer

setabaseoffenselevelof7,seeU.S.S.G.§2B1.1(a)(1),andadded14levelsafterconcluding

thatthelosswasmorethan$400,000butlessthan$1million,seeid.§2B1.1(b)(1)(H).The

probationofficeralsoaddedtwolevelsbecausetheoffenseinvolved10ormorevictims,

seeid.§2B1.1(b)(2)(A)(1),andsubtractedthreelevelsforacceptanceofresponsibility,

see id.§3E1.1.Bosire’stotaloffenselevelof20andcriminalhistorycategoryofIyieldedan

imprisonmentrangeof33to41months.

Inresponsetothepresentencereportandagainatsentencing,defensecounsel

arguedthatBosiremeritedanadditionaltwolevelreductionunderU.S.S.G.§3B1.2(b)asa

minorparticipantinthefraud.CounselarguedthatBosirehadfarlesscontactwiththe

victimsthanMartinMulu,pointingtoseveralvictimstatementsthatcitednocontactwith

Bosire.CounselalsomaintainedthatBosirewasjusta“prop”or“driver,”andthatheoften

remainedinthecarwhileMartinMulutalkedtothevictims.Finally,hearguedthatBosire

hadlessthanfullknowledgeaboutMartinMulu’sinteractionswiththevictimsbecausethe

couplemaintainedseparateresidencesandwereoftenapartwhileBosireattendedclasses

andworkedasatruckdriver.

Thedistrictcourtrejectedthesearguments,reasoningthatbybeingpresentbut

stayinginthecarBosirefacilitatedMartinMulu’sstorythathewasinillhealth.Thecourt

alsonotedthatthefraudhadspannedfouryears,therewasnoindicationthatBosirewas

notfullyawareofwhatwasgoingonorthathehadforegonethebenefitsofthefraud,and

therewasnoindicationthathehadtriedtostopthefraud.Thedistrictcourtadoptedthe

probationofficer’sproposedfindings,sentencedBosireto39months’imprisonment,and

assignedhimjointliabilityforrestitutiontotalingover$980,000.

OnappealBosirearguesthatthedistrictcourterredwhenitdeclinedtogranthima

minorrolereduction,renewinghisargumentsboththathewasamere“prop”inthefraud

andneithernecessarynoressentialtothefraud’ssuccess.Tomeritthereduction,Bosire

hadtoshowbyapreponderanceoftheevidencethathewassubstantiallylessculpablethan

theaverageparticipantinthescheme.SeeU.S.S.G.§3B1.2(b),cmt.n.3(A);UnitedStatesv.

Doe,613F.3d681,687(7thCir.2010).Wereviewforclearerrorthefactualfindings

underlyingasentencingcourt’sdenialofamitigatingroleadjustment.UnitedStatesv.

PanaiguaVerdugo,537F.3d722,724(7thCir.2008).
No.101518 Page3

ButBosireprovidednoevidenceatsentencinginsupportofhisargument.Nordid

heintroduceanyevidencechallengingtheaccuracyoftheinformationcontainedinthe

presentencereport.SeeUnitedStatesv.Heckel,570F.3d791,795(7thCir.2009)(statingthata

defendantcannotchallengeapresentencereportbymakinga“baredenial”ofitsaccuracy);

seealsoUnitedStatesv.Hankton,432F.3d779,790(7thCir.2005).Theevidenceatsentencing

showedthatBosireengagedinafouryearschemewithMartinMulutodefraudabroad

arrayofreligiousgroupsandpersons.Healsotookseveralstepstoassistinthefraud,by

receivingandcashingchecksonatleastoneoccasionandbydrivingMartinMulutovisit

prospectiveandongoingvictims.Andthoughhedisputesthedegreeofbenefithereaped

fromthefraud,itisclearthathedidbenefit—headmittedthathefrequentlygambledwith

someoftheproceedsandspenttherest.Healsofailedtodoanythingtostopthefraud.

Moreover,Bosireadmittedthatheassistedbothincontactingandcontinuingtodefraudthe

Carmelites,whoselossconstitutedthebulkofthemoneytaken.

NorcanBosiredisavowknowledgeofthefullscheme.Heacknowledgedinhisplea

agreementthatthefullproceedsofthefraudwererelevantconductforsentencing

purposes.ItisnotclearfromtherecordifBosirehimselfspoketoanyvictims,buthis

absenceadvancedthecouple’sstorythathewas“toosick”tomeetwithvictims.And

thoughBosirearguesthathehad“lesserknowledge”becausehewasnotpresentforallthe

meetings,thedistrictcourtcreditedMartinMulu’spleahearingtestimonythattherewere

“nosecrets”betweenthecouple;itneednothavecreditedBosire’sunswornallocutionto

thecontrary,U.S.S.G.§3B1.2,cmt.n.3(C);UnitedStatesv.Howard,454F.3d700,703(7thCir.

2006).

AFFIRMED.