## United States Court of App eals

F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 0- 32 41

__ __ __ __ __ _
Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *

* App el le e, *

* App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s

v. * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e
* East ern Dis tri ct of M is so ur i. Mar ki et ta Harv ey , *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

* App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _
Su bm it te d: Apri l 1 5, 2 01 1 Fi le d: Aug us t 8 , 20 11

__ __ __ __ __ _
Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , BENTON and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _
PER CURI AM.

Mar ki et ta Harv ey pl ed gu il ty to co ns pi racy to de frau d, in vi ol at io n of 18 U

. S.C. § 37 1, an d ag gr av at ed id en ti fy th eft
, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 10 28 A. The di st ric t

co ur t se nt en ced Harv ey to 70 m on th s im pr is on m en t. Harv ey ap pe al s he r se nt en ce, 1

co nt en di ng th a t th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in ap pl y in g an ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce

The Hon or ab le Ro dn ey W

. Si pp el
, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.en ha nc em en t un de r th e Gui de li ne s. S e e Uni te d St at es Sen te nc in g Co m m is si on , Gui de li ne s M an ua l, § 3C 1.1 . W e aff irm.

I.

Harv ey joi ne d an id en ti ty-th eft rin g o r g an iz ed by he r bo y fri en d St ep he n Bal dwi n. The gr ou p op en ed cred it acco un ts to ob ta in go od s an d se rv ic es un de r st ol en id en ti ti es , th en so ld th e frau du le nt ly ob ta in ed it em s fo r cas h. To acc o m pl is h th is
, gr ou p m em

be rs were pr ov id ed wit h a co u n t erfe it st at e id en ti fic at io n card an d th e
pe rs on al in fo rm at io n of th e in di vi du al who se id en ti ty ha d be en st ol en

. Sev eral gr ou p

m em be rs wou ld tra ve l to ge th er fro m Ill in oi s to Mi ss ou ri to op en acco un ts an d ob ta in

m erch an di se

. W hi le on on e su ch tr ip
, Harv ey an d th e ot he r gr ou p m em be rs were
ap pr eh en de d.

Harv ey pl ed gu il ty to ag gr av at ed id en ti ty th eft an d co ns pi racy to de frau d. Fo r th e ag gr av at ed id en ti ty th eft co un t, th e di st ric t co ur t im po se d th e st at ut or il y m an da te d
24 m on th s im

pr is on m en t, se e 18 U.S.C. § 10 28 A(a)(1 ), (b )(2 ). Fo r th e co ns pi racy to de frau d co un t, th e di st ric t co ur t cal cu la te d an ad jus te d of fen se le ve l of 17
, th en ad de d

two le ve ls fo r ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce un de r se ct io n 3C 1.1

. Bas ed on an of fen se le ve l
of 19 an d a cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y IV, th e co ur t ca lc ul at ed a Gui de li ne s ra ng e o f
46 to 57 m on th s im

pr is on m en t an d i mp o s ed a se nt en ce of 46 m on th s to be se rv ed

co ns ecu ti ve ly w it h t he 24 -m on th ter m

.

II.

Harv ey ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t’s d e c is io n to im po se th e ob st ru ct io n of jus ti c e e n ha nc em en t, co nt en di ng th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in fin di ng th at sh e

a t t e m pt ed to in ti m id at e a wit ne ss in he r cas e be cau se no ne of th e Gov ern m en t’s

pr of fere d ev id en ce sh owe d in te nt

. W e de fer to th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ci si on to im po se

an ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce enh an cem en t un le ss th e co ur t m ak es in su ffi ci en t fin di ng s.

-2

-Uni te d St at es v. Cu nn in gh am , 59 3 F.3 d 72 6, 73 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). “ The di st ric t co ur t

m us t fin d th e pr ed ic at e fact s su pp or ti ng an en ha nc em en t fo r ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce by

a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce, an d we rev ie w th os e f i n d i n g s f or cl ear erro r.”
Uni te d S ta te s v . Mo nt es -Me di na , 57 0 F .3d 10 52 , 10 61 (8t h C ir. 2 00 9)

.

The ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce en ha nc em en t ap pl ie s whe n th e de fen da nt “ wil lfu ll y ob st ru ct ed or imp e d ed
, or at te m pt ed to ob st ru ct or im

pe de
, th e ad m in is tra ti on of jus ti ce wit h res pe ct to th e in ve st ig at io n, pr os ecu ti on , or se nt en ci ng o f t h e i n st an t of fen se of co nv ic ti on .” U.S.S.G. §3 C1 .1. The co m m en ta ry to se ct io n 3C 1.1 ex pl ai ns th at “t h r eat en in g, in ti m id at in g, or ot he rwis e un la wfu ll y in flu en ci ng ” a wit ne ss

“ di rect ly or in di rect ly, or at te m pt in g to do so ,” is co n d u c t t h a t warra nt s th e ob st ru ct io n o f jus ti ce en ha nc em en t. U.S.S.G. §3 C1 .1 co m m en t. (n .4).

Bas ed on th e te st im on y of Terri ck Harv ey , Harv ey ’s br o t he r an d on e-t im e

m em be r o f t h e i d e nt it y -th eft rin g, th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at Harv ey at te m pt ed to in ti m id at e Terri ck

. The te st im on y refl ect ed th at Harv ey se nt a le tt er to Oti s Mo rg an ,
on e of Terri ck ’s fel lo w in m at es in th e Ph el ps Co un ty Ja il
, an d in fo rm ed hi m th at Terri ck pl an ne d to te st ify ag ai ns t he r. Mo rg an th en ap pr oa ch ed Terri ck an d warn ed
hi m ag ai ns t te st ifyin g be cau se do in g so wou ld jeop ard iz e Terri ck ’s sa fet y

. The
di st ric t co ur t cred it ed Terri ck ’s te st im on y , an d th e “ co ur t’s as se ss m en t of wit ne ss cred ib il it y is vi rtu al ly un as sa il ab le on ap pe al .” Uni te d St at es v. Harri s, 49 3 F.3 d 92 8,
93 2 (8 th Cir . 20 07 ).

Harv ey ne ve rth el es s co nt en ds tha t T er ri ck ’ s te sti m ony w as ins uf fi ci en t to pr ove Harv ey ’s in te nt be cau se it on ly sh owe d th at Harv ey se n t t he le tt er, no t th at sh e in te nd ed to in ti m id at e or th reat en Terri ck by do in g so

. Thi s arg um en t fai ls
, ho wev er, be cau se we ha ve lo ng he ld th at in te nt m ay be pr ov en wit h ci rcu m st an ti al ev id en ce.

-3

-S ee Uni te d St at es v. Dvo rak , 6 17 F.3 d 10 17 , 1 02 3- 24 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ), cert . d en ie d
,

13 1 S . Ct. 1 53 9 (2 01 1) . Accor di ng ly, th e d is tri ct co ur t d id no t cl earl y err. 2

In ad di ti on , we m od ify th e jud gm en t in th is cas e to c o r r ect a cl eri cal erro r; Ha r v e y i s gu il ty o f vi ol at in g 18 U.S.C. § 37 1, rat he r th an “ 18 U.S.C. § 37 11 .” See
28 U.S.C. § 21 06 (p ro vi di ng th at an ap pe ll at e co ur t m ay m od ify an y jud gm en t br ou gh t b efo re i t fo r rev ie w).

III.

W e affi rm th e se nt en ce im po se d by th e di st ric t co ur t an d m od ify th e jud gm en t

to refl ect th at Harv ey

is gu il ty of vi ol at in g 1 8 U.S.C. § 37 1.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

W e do no t reac h Harv ey ’s ad di ti on al arg um en t reg ard in g acce pt a n c e o f 2

res po ns ib il it y be cau se it is pr ed ic at ed on th e rev ers al of the di st ric t co ur t’s ap pl ic at io n of th e ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce en ha nc em en t, an d Harv ey ack no wled ge s th at he rs is no t

an “ ex tra or di na ry cas e” warra nt in g th e ap pl ic at io n of bo th th e ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce

en ha nc em en t an d th e acce pt an ce of res p o n s i b il it y red uc ti on , se e U.S.S.G. §3 E1.1

co m m en t. (n .4).

-4

-