# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 7- 13 27

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

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

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e ,

v.

Si en em ah Terran ce Gaye,

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 7- 13 47

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

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

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e ,

v.

Fi no h S ah r Fi ll ie

,

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 7- 14 96

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

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

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e ,v.

Pri nc e Kor bo i Su m os o,

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

App eal s fr om

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t
fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - St. Pa ul

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 15 , 20 18

Fi le d: Aug us t 2 9, 2 01 8

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re SM ITH, Chi ef J ud ge , MURPHY an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s. *

__ __ __ __ __ __

COLLOTON, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

Si en em ah Gay e, Fi no h Fi ll ie

, an d Pri nc e Su m os o, al on g wit h twen ty-two ot he r

co

- d e f e n d a nt s, were in di ct ed fo r th ei r in vo lv em en t in a sc he m e to de frau d ba nk s. Gay e pl ead ed gu il ty to co ns pi racy to co m m it ba nk frau d, se e 18 U.S.C. §§ 13 44 an d

13 49

, twen ty co un ts of ai di ng an d ab et ti ng ba nk frau d, se e 18 U.S.C. § 13 44

, an d two

co un ts of ai di ng an d ab et ti ng ag gr av at ed id en ti ty th eft

, se e 18 U.S.C. § 10 28 A. Fi ll ie
pl e a d e d g u i l t y to co ns pi racy to co m m it ba nk frau d an d on e co un t of ai di ng an d

ab et ti ng ag g r a v a t ed id en ti ty t he ft. Su m os o pl ead ed gu il ty t o co ns pi racy t o co m m it

ba nk frau d an d fo ur c o u n t s of ai di ng an d ab et ti ng ba nk frau d. The di st ric t co ur t 1

Thi s op in io n is fil ed by Ch ie f Ju dg e Sm it h an d Ju dg e Co ll ot on un de r Eig ht h *

Ci rcu it Ru le 47 E.

The Hon or ab le Jo hn R. Tun he im

, Ch ie f Judg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1

th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta

.

-2

-se nt en ced Gay e, Fi l l i e , a n d Su m os o to 14 4, 13 4, an d 54 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t,

res pe ct iv el y , an d or de red each to pa y res ti tu ti on

. The th ree de fen da nt s ap pe al

, al le gi ng th at th e di st ric t cou rt e rred in de te rm in in g t he ir s en te nc es . For t he reas on s

ex pl ai ne d b el ow, we af

fir m

.

I.

The co ns pi racy in th is cas e in vo lv ed a sc he m e to de frau d fin an ci al in st it ut io ns

in th e Mi nn eap ol is -St

. Pau l m et ro area by cas hi ng co un te rfei t c h e c k s dr awn on

acco un ts of bu si ne ss es an d in di vi du al s. Part ic ip an ts in th e s c h e me pl ay ed se ve ral

ro le s. “ Man uf

act ur ers ” crea te d th e co un te rfei t ch eck s us in g ch eck -p rin ti ng so ftwa re

an d bl an k che ck st oc k. “ Ban k in si de rs ” pr ov id ed ba nk acco un t i nf or m at io n for us e

on co un te rfei t ch eck s. “ Man ag ers ” an d “ recr ui te rs ” en li st ed in di vi du al s who wou ld

se rv e as pa y ees on th e ch eck s. The se in di vi du al s, call ed “ ru nn ers ,” to ok th e ch eck s

to th e b an k t o c as h o r de po si t.

Mem be rs of th e co ns pi racy acq ui red p ay or acco un t in fo rm at io n th ro ug h

va rio us m ean s. Usi ng so ci al m ed ia

, pa rti ci pa nt s se arch ed th e ha sh ta g

“ #m y fir st pa y ch eck ” an d fo un d ph ot og rap hs of le gi ti m at e pa y ch eck s th at un wit ti ng

vi ct im s ha d po st ed on li ne

. Ban k in si de rs so m et im es pr ov id ed acco un t in fo rm at io n.

So m e co ns pi rat or s wil li ng ly t ur ne d ov er th ei r own pa y ro ll or pe rs on al ch eck s t o b e

co un te rfei te d b y

ot he r m em

be rs of t he co ns pi racy.

Gay e was in vo lv ed in th is sc he m e fro m Ju ne 20 05 to Sep te m be r 20 13

. Su m os o

an d Fi ll ie joi ne d la te r, wit h Su m os o pa rti ci pa ti ng fro m A u g u s t 20 07 to Sep te m be r

20 13

, an d Fi ll ie pa rti ci pa ti ng fro m Nov em be r 20 07 un ti l Sep te m

be r 20 13

. Dur in g th e

pe rio d b et ween Nov em

be r 20 07 an d S ep te m

be r 20 13 alo ne , m or e th an 50 0 ru nn ers

ne go ti at ed ov er 15 00 co un te rfei t or frau du le nt ch eck s. Gay e an d Fi ll ie pr in te d ch eck s

an d pa ss ed th em to th e ru nn ers who to ok th e ch eck s to a ba nk to cas h or de po si t. The

two al so op en ed ba nk acco un t s a n d n e g ot ia te d co un te rfei t ch eck s in th e na m es of

-3

-in di vi du al s who se id en ti ti es ha d be en st ol en

. Su m os o se rv ed pr im ari ly as a recr ui te r;

he pr ov id ed ru nn er in fo rm at io n to m an uf act ur ers an d tra ns po rte d ru nn ers to ba nk s to

de po si t t he frau du le nt ch eck s.

Gay e, Fi ll ie , a nd Su m os o pl ead ed gu il ty t o th e ch arg es ag ai ns t t he m , and th e

di st ric t co ur t he ld a co ns ol id at ed ev id en ti ary he ari ng to res ol ve di sp ut ed se nt en ci ng

is su es

. The co ur t m ad e fin di ng s un de r th e se nt en ci ng gu id el in es th at in crea se d th e

o f f e ns e le ve ls fo r each de fen da nt

. On ap pe al

, Gay e, Fi ll ie

, an d Su m os o eac h

ch al le ng e th ei r se nt en ces , arg ui ng pr im ari ly th at th e di st ric t co ur t co m m it te d

pr oc ed ur al erro r in ap pl y in g t he gu id el in es

. W e rev ie w th e d is tri ct co ur t’s fi nd in gs

of fact for cle ar er ro r an d i ts ap pl ic at io n o f th e g ui de li ne s de no vo

.

II.

A.

1.

Gay e rai se s se ve n cl a i ms of erro r. He fir st co m pl ai ns th at th e di st ric t co ur t

im pr op erl y co ns id ered a rep or t of Gay e’s pr of fer in te rv ie w wit h th e go ve rn m en t. The

rep or t in cl ud ed se lf- in cri m in at in g st at em en ts ab ou t Gay e’s in vo lv em en t in th e ba nk

frau d sc he m e. Gay e arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t rel ie d on th e s t a t e men t s in

up ho ld in g th e go ve rn m en t’s refu sa l to m ov e fo r a on e-l ev el red uc ti on fo r acce pt an ce

of res po ns ib il it y un de r USSG § 3E1 .1(b ). He co nt en ds th at t he co ur t’s us e of th e

in fo rm at io n was co nt rary to USS G § 1 B1 .8(a ) an d t he pro ffer ag reem en t.

USSG § 1B 1.8 (a) ad dr es se s th e us e of in fo rm at io n pr ov id ed by a de fen da nt

who ag rees to co op erat e wit h in ve st ig at or s. W he re th e go ve rn m en t ag rees th at se lfin cri m in at in g in fo rm at io n pr ov id ed un de r an ag reem en t wil l no t be us ed ag ai ns t th e

de fen da nt

, § 1B 1.8 (a) pr ov id es th at th e di st ric t co ur t m us t no t us e th e in fo rm at io n to

-4

-de te rm in e th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in e ran ge , “ ex cep t to th e ex te nt pr ov id ed in th e

ag reem en t.”

Befo re pl ead in g gu il ty, Gay e ag reed to m eet wit h th e go ve rn m en t to pr ov id e

in fo rm at io n co nc ern in g th e ba nk frau d co ns pi racy. As pa rt of th at arra ng em en t, th e

pa rti es si gn ed an ag reem en t th at s e t fo rth th e te rm s an d co nd it io ns of th e pr of fer

in te rv ie w. Am on g ot he r th in gs , th e go ve rn m en t agre ed th at it “ w[o ul d] no t offe r in

ev id en ce

. . . i n co nn ect io n wit h an y se nt en ci ng pr oc eed in g fo r th e pu rp os e of

de te rm in in g an ap pr op ria te se nt en ce, an y st at em en ts m ad e by [Gay e] at th e m eet in g,”

su bjec t to cert ai n en um erat ed ex cep ti on s. Und er on e ex cep ti o n , th e pa rti es ag reed

t h a t “t h e g o v ern m en t m ay us e

. . . s ta te m en ts m ad e by [Gaye] at th e m eet in g

. . . t o

re bu t an y e vi de nc e, ar

gu men t or re

pr es en ta ti on s of

fe re d by or on be ha lf of

[Ga ye]

. . . at sen te nc in g .” (em

ph as is ad de d)

.

W he t h e r th e di st ric t co ur t pr op erl y co ns id ered Gay e’s pr of fer in te rv ie w at

se nt en ci ng tu rn s on whe th er th e qu ot ed ex cep ti on a l l o w ed fo r th e us e of th e

in fo rm at io n. The di st ric t cou rt con cl ud ed th at “ ba se d on th e fact s and th e la ng ua ge

of th e pr of

fer ag reem en t,” Gay e’s st at em en ts du rin g th e in te rv ie w co ul d be us ed “ fo r

th e li m it ed pu rp os e o f r e b u t t i ng Mr. Gay e’s de ni al of m an y of th e fact s in th e [p res en te nc e in ve st ig at io n re po rt].” W e ag ree.

Dur in g th e pr of

fer in te rv ie w, Gay e ex pl ai ne d th at he pr in te d an d si gn ed ch eck s

fo r ot he r m em

be rs of th e co ns pi racy, an d sa id th at he “ rece iv ed $2 00 -$ 30 0 pe r ch eck

fo r each pe rs on he recr ui te d.” He ad m it te d t ha t he an d hi s co -co ns pi rat or s “ ha d

m eet in gs ” at va rio us lo cat io ns du rin g whi ch th ey “ wou ld di sc us s is su es reg ard in g th e

cu ts of ch eck s no t be in g pa id or pe op le ru nn in g of f wit h th e m on ey .” Gay e al so to ld

t h e g o v e r nm en t th at he an d a co -co ns pi rat or op en ed a ba nk acco un t in th e na me o f

Ri ch ard W y ss

.

-5

-Bu t in hi s ob jecti on s to th e pr es en te nc e in ve st ig at io n rep or t (PSR ) pr ep ared by

th e pr ob at io n of

fic e, G a ye d e n ie d m an y of th es e fact s. He ob jecte d to an d de ni ed

st at em en ts th at he “ crea te d c ou nt erfe it ch eck s,” “ pr ov id ed co un te rfei t ch eck s,” an d

“ sh ared in th e frau du le nt pr oc eed s of th e sc he m e.” Gay e ob jecte d to th e st at em en t

th at “ m em

be rs of th e co ns pi racy m et at va rio us lo c a t i o ns to di st rib ut e ch eck s an d

pr oc eed s of th e frau d an d al so to di sc us s lo gi st ic s of th e sc he m e, di sp ut es am on g th e

c o c o n s pi rat or s an d rel at ed to pi cs .” He ad de d a de ni al : “ Defen da nt de ni es t h e

mee t in gs oc cu rred an d th at he was an at te nd ee of th e m eet in gs .” Gay e al so de n i e d

th at h e “ op en ed a frau du le nt Ban k of Am eri ca acco un t us in g th e real na m e, da te of

bi rth

, an d so ci al se cu rit y nu m be r of vi ct im R.D.W

., a real pe rs on who se id en ti ty ha d

be en st ol en , bu t wit h Gay e’s ad dr es s an d ph on e nu m be r.” Gaye s t o o d b y hi s

ob jecti on s at th e se nt en ci ng he ari ng , ev en th ou gh he ha d pl ead ed gu il ty to ag gr av at ed

id en ti ty th eft in vo lv in g vi ct im R.D.W

., an d ev en th ou gh th e go ve rn m en t pr es en te d

ad di ti on al te st im on y du rin g th e he ari ng to su bs ta nt ia te ot he r fact ua l al le ga ti on s in th e

PSR.

Gay e co nt en ds th at hi s ob jecti on s to th e PSR were no t “ ev id en ce, arg um en t or

rep res en ta ti on s,” so th e co ur t was n o t pe rm it te d to co ns id er hi s pr of fer in te rv ie w

un de r th e ex cep ti on st at ed in th e ag reem en t

. B u t Gay e di d m or e th an ob ject to th e

fact s li st ed in th e PSR an d pu t th e go ve rn m en t t o it s bu rd en of pr oo f. By

affi rm at iv el y de nyin g cert ai n fact s, Gay e as se rte d th at th os e fact s were no t tru e. Thi s

am ou nt ed to m ak in g “ rep res en ta ti on s” ab ou t t ho se fact s.

Gay e al so arg ue s th at hi s “ st at em en ts were en ti rel y co ns is te n t w i t h th e

co nf id en ti al in fo rm at io n he sh ared wit h th e Gov ern m en t,” bu t we di sa gr ee. Gay e’s

de ni al s di rect ly co nt rad ic te d so m e of th e in fo rm at io n he pr ov id ed to th e go ve rn m en t

be fo re se nt en ci n g , a n d th eref or e tri gg ered th e ex cep ti on in th e pr of fer ag reem en t.

The ag reem en t th us pe rm it te d th e di st ric t co ur t to co ns id er Gay e’s st at em en ts “ fo r th e

pu rp os e of de te rm in in g an ap pr o p r i a t e s en te nc e.” Se e Uni te d St at es v. Lo es el , 7 28

-6

-F.3 d 74 9, 75 3- 54 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ); se e al so Uni te d St at es v. Ara uj o , 62 2 F.3 d 85 4,

86 0- 62 (7t h C ir. 2 01 0)

.

2.

Gay e co nt en ds th at th e co ur t erre d by in crea si ng hi s of fen se le ve l un de r USSG

§ 3C 1.1 fo r ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce. Sect io n 3C 1.1 pr ov id es fo r a tw o

- l ev el in crea se

if th e de fen da nt “ wil lfu ll y ob st ru ct ed or

. . . at te m pt ed t o o b s t r u ct

. . . 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

of th e in st an t of

fen se of co nv ic ti on ,” so lo ng as “ th e ob st ru ct iv e co nd uc t rel at ed to

. . . th e de fen da nt ’s of

fen se of co nv ic ti on an d an y re le va nt co nduct.” Obs tru ct iv e co nd uc t

in cl ud es , am on g ot he r th in gs , “ t h r e at 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 ,” as well as

“ ot he r co nd uc t pr oh ib it ed by ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce pr ov is io ns un de r Tit le 18

, Uni te d

St at es Co de .” USSG § 3 C1 .1, co m m en t. (n .4(A) , (I)).

The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at G a ye h a d a tt em pt ed to di sc ou rag e a wit ne ss , Je ffre y Gbo r, fro m te st ifyin g at hi s tri al

. The co ur t ci te d a se rie s of te xt m es sa ge s th at

G a ye ex ch an ge d wit h Gbo r’s gi rlf rie nd

, Kian a Harri s, an d ot he r co m m un ic at io n s

be twee n Har ris , Gbo r, Gbo r’s fri en d, an d Gb or ’s bro th er.

Befo re pl ead in g g u i l t y, Gay e le arn ed th ro ug h di sc ov ery th at th e go ve rn m en t

was pl an ni ng to cal l Gbo r as a w i t n e s s a g a in st hi m

. Gay e se nt a te xt m es sa ge to

Harri s on May 1, te ll in g he r th at Gbo r was go in g to te st ify ag ai ns t hi m

. Harri s

res po nd ed wit h di sb el ie f an d sa id

, “ Doe s so da kn ow? ?

. . . Maybe he can ta lk to hi m

n te ll hi m to ch il l.” (“ So da ” is a ni ck na m e fo r Gbo r’s fri en d Ma rcel Ch am be rs .)

Gay e st at ed th at he ha d no t ta lk ed to So da y et

, an d Harri s rep li ed

, “ U wan t m e to te ll

so da ? ? I kn ow th ey ta lk .” Gay e res po nd ed

, “ Yea.” A few m in ut es la te r, Harri s se nt

a te xt m es sa ge to So da

, refe rri ng to Gay e by hi s ni ck na m e “ Nem a.” The m es sa ge

st at ed : “ Nem a jus t hi t m e n to ld m e he ’s in hi s la wy ers of fic e an d jus t fo un d ou t th at

-7

-Je ffer y

is go in g t o t es ti fy

ag ai ns t h im

. . . . Can u p le as e ta lk to hi m n t el l h im

to fal l

ba ck on th at .”

S o d a r es po nd ed ab ou t fif te en m in ut es la te r, ex pr es si ng di sb el ie f bu t te ll in g

Harri s t ha t h e wou ld “ se e wus su p th o.” Harri s fo rward ed So da ’s m es sa ge to Gay e,

an d in res po ns e, Gay e se nt Harri s pi ct ur es th at he to ok of do cu m en ts sh owi ng Gbo r’s

co op erat io n wit h th e go ve rn m en t. Harri s fo rw a rd ed on e of th es e ph ot os to So da

, rei te rat in g th at Gbo r was te st ifyin g ag ai n s t G a ye , an d sa y in g “ U b et te r try n ta lk to

hi m ASAP.” In an ot he r m es sa ge , Harri s to ld So da

, “ Ho p e f ul ly he reca nt s hi s

st at em en t.” So da sai d, “ Ri gh t . . . m ay be he won ’t tes ti fy

if I s ay so m et hi ng .”

Thre e da y s la te r, on May 4, Gbo r to ld th e go ve rn m en t th at he no lo ng er wis he d

to c o o p e rat e. So da se nt Harri s a m es sa ge te ll in g he r th at Gbo r was no t go in g to

te st ify a ga in st Gay e. Harri s rep or te d ba ck to Gay e th at “ [S]od a sa id he ta lk ed to

sn it ch bi tc h an d he sa id he was n’t go in g to te st ify if th ey cal le d hi m to th e st an d.” In

a la te r m es sa ge , sh e sa id , “ Anyway , ho pe fu ll y th at he lp s.”

Gay e co nt en ds th a t u n d e r a “ ne ut ral read in g,” hi s m es sa ge s to Harri s do no t

co ns ti tu te ob st ru ct io n, be cau se th ey do no t “ su gg es t [Gay e] so ug ht to in ti m id at e Gbo r

t o r e c a n t hi s co op erat io n.” Bu t th e gu id el in e do es no t req ui re a fin di ng o f

in ti m id at io n. Obs tru ct iv e co nd uc t u n d e r § 3C 1.1 al so en co m pa ss es “ un la wfu ll y

in flu en ci ng ” a wit ne ss or at te m pt in g to do so , an d any “ ot he r co nd uc t pro hi bi te d by

ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce pr ov is io ns un de r Tit le 18

, Uni te d St at es Co de .” Id

. , co m m en t.
(n .4(A) , (I)).

The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at Gay e a t t e mp t e d to “ di sc ou rag e a wit ne ss fro m

te st ifyin g.” R. Doc

. 13 41

, at 44

. The fed e r a l w i t ne ss ta m pe rin g st at ut e, 18 U.S.C.

§ 15 12 (b )(1 ), m ak es it a cri m e to “ kn owi ng ly

. . . co rru pt ly pe rs ua de [] an ot he r pe rs on ,

or at te m pt [] to do so , . . . wit h in te nt to

. . . in flu en ce, de la y , or pr ev en t th e te st im on y

of an y pe rs on in an of

fic ia l pr oc eed in g.” A de fen da nt m ay be fo un d to en ga ge

-8

-kn owi ng ly in co rru pt pe rs ua si on whe re he act s wit h “ co ns ci ou sn es s of wro ng do in g.”

Uni te d St at es v. Man n , 70 1 F.3 d 27 4, 30 5- 06 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ). The di st ric t co ur t di d

no t cl earl y

err i n fi nd in g t ha t Gaye’ s co nd uc t m et th at st an da rd

.

Gay e’s m es sa ge s wit h Harri s m ak e cl ear th at Gay e kn ew th at Gbo r ha d

pr ov id ed ev id en ce th at in cri m in a t ed Gay e. Gay e’s ag reem en t wit h Harri s to ha ve

S o d a te ll Gbo r to “ ch il l,” fo ll owe d by hi s tra ns m is si on of do cu m en ts to Ha r r i s

co nf irming th at Gay e was a co op erat in g wi tn es s, d em on st rat es th at Gay e kn ew th at

he was at te m

pt in g to in flu en ce, de la y , or pr ev en t th e te st im on y of Gbo r in an of fic ia l

pr oc eed in g ag ai ns t Gay e. The ev id en ce su pp or te d a f i n d i ng th at Gay e di d so wit h

co ns ci ou sn es s of wro ng do in g. Eve n as su m in g th at in no cen t at te m pt s t o en co ur ag e

a pe rs on to ex erci se hi s rig ht ag ai ns t se lf- in cri m in at io n do no t vi ol at e th e st at ut e, se e

Uni te d St at es v. Far re ll

, 12 6 F.3 d 48 4, 4 8 8 ( 3 d Ci r. 19 97 ), th e reco rd su pp or ts a

fin di ng th at Gay e di d m or e. Gbo r al read y ha d pl ead ed gu il ty, waiv ed hi s rig ht ag ai ns t

se lf- in c r im in at io n, an d di sc lo se d in cri m in at in g in fo rm at io n ab ou t Gay e to th e

go ve r n men t

. Gay e th en at te m pt ed to st op Gbo r fro m te st ifyin g. It was th us no t

cl earl y erro ne ou s to fin d th at Gay e’s m es sa ge s co ns ti tu te d ob st ru ct io n of jus ti ce th at

warra nt ed a two -le ve l in crea se un de r th e gu id el in es

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Hemsh er , 89 3 F .3d 52 5, 5 35 (8t h C ir. 2 01 8)

.

3.

Gay e ne xt co m

pl ai ns th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d by no t award in g hi m a th ird

le ve l red uc ti on un de r th e gu i d e l i n e f o r acce pt an ce of res po ns ib il it y

. Se e USSG

§ 3E1 .1. He rece iv ed a two -le ve l r e d u c ti on fo r acce pt in g res po ns ib il it y

. The

gu id el in es pe rm it a se nt en ci ng co ur t to de crea se by on e a d d i t i on al le ve l, “ up on

m ot io n of th e go ve rn m en t,” if th e de fen da nt ’s gu il ty pl ea al lo wed th e go ve rn m en t an d

co ur t to al lo cat e res ou rces effi ci en tl y

. USSG § 3E1 .1(b ); se e al so id

. , co m

m en t. (n .6).

The go ve rn m en t di d no t m ov e fo r a th ird -le ve l red uc ti on , an d a di st ric t co ur t “ m ay

no t or de r th e go ve rn m en t to f i l e t he m ot io n un le ss th e go ve rn m en t’s refu sa l was

-9

-ba se d on un co ns ti tu ti on al m ot iv e.” Uni te d St at es v. Jo rd an , 87 7 F.3 d 39 1, 39 4 (8 th

Ci r. 20 17 ).

G a y e as se rts th at th e go ve rn m en t la ck ed an y ba si s to wit hh ol d th e m ot io n

. In so far as he m ean s th a t th e go ve rn m en t act ed irr at io na ll y , an d th us

un co ns ti tu ti on al ly, th e reco rd d o es no t su pp or t th e co nt en ti on

. The go ve rn m en t

arg ue d at se nt en ci ng th at Gay e was no t en ti tl ed to an y red uc ti on at al l, be cau se he ha d

fri vo lo us ly de ni ed fact s in th e pr es en te nc e rep or t an d ob st ru ct ed jus ti ce. The se were

le gi t i mate ba se s fo r op po si ng an y red uc ti on fo r acce pt an ce of res po ns ib il it y , se e

USSG § 3E1 .1, co m

m en t. (n n.3 -4 ), an d th e di st ric t co ur t’s ge ne ro us award of a two

le ve l red uc ti on di d no t co m pe l th e go ve rn m en t to m ov e fo r a th ird

. The di st ric t co ur t

co m m it te d no cl ear erro r in de c l i n i n g to award Gay e a th ree- le ve l red uc ti on fo r

acce pt an ce o f res po ns ib il it y

.

4.

Gay e al so ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t’s cal cu la t i o n of lo ss am ou nt

. The

gu id el in es pr ov id e fo r a fo ur te en -le ve l in crea se if lo ss fro m th e de fen da nt ’s of fen se

is gr eat er th an $5 50 ,00 0 bu t le ss th a n o r e q ua l to $1 ,50 0,0 00

. USSG

§ 2B 1.1 (b )(1 )(H). “ Los s” un de r th is pr ov is io n is th e gr eat er of act ua l lo ss or in te nd ed

lo ss

. USSG § 2B 1.1

, co m m en t. (n .3(A) ). Actu al lo ss is “ th e reas on ab ly fo res eeab le

pe cu ni ary h arm

th at res ul te d fr om th e of fen se ,” an d in te nd ed lo ss is th e “ pe cu ni ary

ha rm th at th e de fen da nt pu rp os el y so ug ht to in fli ct .” Id

. , com m en t. (n .3(A) (i) -(i i))

. Afte r co nc lu di ng th at th e act ua l lo ss fro m G a ye’s of fen se ex ceed ed th e am ou nt of

in te nd ed lo ss , th e di st ric t co ur t ad op te d th e go ve rn m en t’s lo ss fig ur e of $7 70 ,95 1.0 7,

an d i nc reas ed Gay e’s of

fen se lev el acco rd in gl y

.

Gay e co nt en ds th at th e fact s do no t su pp or t th e co ur t’s cal cu la ti on

. He arg ue s

th at he sh ou ld ha ve be en he ld a cco un ta bl e fo r on ly th e lo ss res ul ti ng fro m hi s own

crea ti on an d ne go ti at io n of co un te rfei t ch eck s. Bu t a “ se nt en ci ng co ur t m us t in cl ud e

-1 0-in it s cal cu la ti on an y lo ss es cau se d by ‘relev an t co nd uc t.’” Uni te d St at es v. Que ved o , 65 4 F.3 d 81 9, 82 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ). In th e c a s e o f a joi nt ly un de rta ke n cri m in al

act iv it y , rel ev an t co nd uc t in cl ud es “ al l act s an d om is si on s of ot he rs th at were

. . . (i)

wit hi n th e sc op e of th e joi nt ly un de rta ke n cri m in al act iv it y , (ii ) in fu rth eran ce of th at

cri m in al act iv it y , an d (ii i) reas on ab ly fo res eeab le in co nn ect i o n wit h th at cri m in al

act iv it y ” an d th at “ oc cu rred du rin g th e co m m is si on of th e o f

f e n s e o f co nv ic ti on .”

USSG § 1B 1.3 (a)( 1) (B). W he n de te rm in in g whe th er act s of co -co ns pi rat or s qu al ify

a s r e le va nt co nd uc t un de r th e gu id el in es , we lo ok to “ th e sc op e of th e in di vi d u a l

de fe nd an t’s un de rta ki ng an d fo res eeab ili ty in li gh t of th at un de rta ki ng , rat he r th an th e

sc op e of th e co ns pi racy as a who le .” Uni te d St at es v. Sp ot te d Elk

, 54 8 F.3 d 64 1, 67 4
(8 th Cir . 20 08 ).

The di st ric t co ur t di d no t cl ear l y e r r i n f in di ng th at th e sc op e of Gay e’s

in vo lv em en t in th e co ns pi racy was su bs ta nt ia l, a n d th at th e frau du le nt tra ns act io ns

of hi s co -co ns pi rat or s were fo res eeab le to hi m

. The ev id en ce te nd ed to sh ow th at
Gay e ha d ext en si ve kn owl ed ge of h ow t he sch em e o pe rat ed . Detec ti ve Jo el Mo or e

of th e Edi na Po li ce Dep art m en t te st ifi ed th at Gay e ha d be en in vo lv ed wit h th e ba nk

frau d sc he m e al m os t fro m it s in cep ti on , an d he de sc rib ed Gay e’s in vo lv em en t as bo th

a ru nn er an d m an uf

act ur er fo r th e sc he m e—depos iti ng frau du le nt ch eck s in to hi s own

acco un t an d pr in ti ng co un te rfei t ch eck s fo r ot he rs . The d et ect iv e al so te st ifi ed th at
Gay e co or d i n a t e d an d at te nd ed m eet in gs wit h se ve ral of hi s co -co ns pi rat or s whe re

th e gr ou p di sc us se d di vi di ng pr oc eed s of th e frau d an d lo gi st ic al is su es pr es en te d by

th e sc he m e.

The go ve rn m en t pres en te d a ch art th at de ta il ed da te s of tra ns act io ns , acco un t

ho ld ers , th e ch eck ru nn er’s na m e, an d th e a m ou nt of lo ss as so ci at ed wit h each

tra ns a c t i o n th at la w en fo rcem en t be li ev ed was at tri bu ta bl e to Gay e. Acco rd in g to

Dete ct iv e Mo or e , t he ch art “ refl ect [ed ] al l th e tra ns act io ns th at la w en fo rcem en t

li nk ed to th is co n s p i r a c y.” Sp eci al Age nt Sh an no n Kor pe la of th e IRS co nc ur red

,
te st ifyin g th at sh e an d Dete c t i v e M o o r e de te rm in ed th at th e ch eck s on th e lo ss

-1 1-sc he du le s were c o n n e c t e d to th e co ns pi racy b as ed on tra sh pu ll s, in fo rm at io n fro m

te le ph on es se iz ed d u r i n g a se arch

, a ch eck -cre at in g so ftwa re pr og ram fo un d on Gay e’s co m

pu te r, an d i nf

or m at io n re cei ve d fr om

co op erat in g wi tn es se s.

The co ur t di d no t cl earl y err in fin di ng th a t t h e tra ns act io ns co nd uc te d by

Gay e’s co -co ns pi rat or s were wit hi n th e sc op e of th e co ns pi racy an d were reas on ab ly

f o res eeab le in li gh t of Gay e’s ex te ns iv e in vo lv em en t in th e sc he m e. The c o u r t

th eref or e pr op erl y t r eat ed th e lo ss at tri bu te d to th os e co -co ns pi rat or s as rel ev an t

co nd uc t, an d co m

m it te d no cl ear erro r in co nc lu di ng th at th e Gay e was res po ns ib le

fo r th e to ta l l os s l is te d o n t he go ve rn m en t’s ch art

.

5.

G ay e ne xt co m

pl ai ns th at th e di st ric t co ur t cl earl y erre d by ap pl y in g a f o u r

le ve l in crea se un de r USSG § 3B 1.1 fo r Gay e’s ro le in th e of fen se as an or ga ni zer or

le ad er. “ To qu al ify fo r an ad jus tm en t un de r [§ 3B 1.1 ], th e de fen da nt m us t ha ve be en

t h e or ga ni zer, le ad er, m an ag er, or su pe rv is or of on e or m or e ot he r pa rti ci pa n t s

. ”

USSG § 3B 1.1

, co mm e n t

. ( n

. 2)

. To di st in gu is h an or ga ni zer or le ad er fro m a

m an ag er or su pe rv is or , t he co ur t m ay co ns id er: ( 1) th e ex erci se of de ci si on m ak in g

au th or it y , (2 ) th e na tu r e o f p a r t ic ip at io n in th e co m m is si on of th e of

fen se , (3 ) th e

recr ui tm en t of acco m

pl ic es , (4 ) th e cl ai m ed rig ht to a la rg er sh are of th e fru it s of th e

cri m e, (5 ) th e de gr ee of pa rti ci pa ti on in pl an ni ng or or g a n i z i n g th e of fen se , (6 ) th e

na tu re an d sc op e of th e il le ga l act iv it y , an d (7 ) th e de g r e e o f c o n t ro l an d au th or it y

ex erci se d o ve r ot he rs . USSG § 3 B1 .1, co m m en t. (n .4).

The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at Gay e was an or ga ni zer or le ad er ba se d on it s

fin di ng s th at “ Gay e cal le d m eet in gs , m on it or ed acco un ts

, ob ta in ed vi ct im

in fo rm at io n, was in m an y res pe ct s in th e Co ur t’s vi ew th e in it ia to r of th e co ns pi racy

an d was in vo lv ed fro m st art to fin is h.” Th e co ur t al so ci te d “ th e te xt m es sa ge s in

whi ch Mr. Gay e was di rect in g ot he rs as th e cri m e was be in g co m m it te d.” The reco rd

-1 2-su pp or ts th es e fin di ng s, an d we se e no cl ear erro r i n t h e co ur t’s ap pl ic at io n of th e

fo ur -le ve l ad

jus tm en t.

6.

Gay e ne xt arg ue s th at th e co ur t cl earl y erre d by ap pl y in g a two -le ve l sp eci fic

of fen se ch arac te ris ti c un de r USSG § 2B 1.1 (b )(1 0) (C) fo r a n o ffen se in vo lv in g

“ so ph is ti cat ed m ean s” —t ha t is

, “ es pe ci al ly co m p l e x or es pe ci al ly in tri cat e of fen se

co nd uc t pe rta in in g to th e ex ecu ti on or co nc eal m en t of an offen se .” USSG § 2B 1.1

,

co m m en t. (n .9(B )). In fin di ng th at Gay e qu al ifi ed fo r th e in crea se , th e di st ric t co ur t

hi gh li gh te d th e sc he m e’s rep et it io n an d co or di na ti on , an d fo un d th at Gay e op en ed a

frau du le nt bu si ne ss acco un t t o fu rth er t he en te rp ris e.

“ So ph is ti cat ed m ean s ne ed no t be hi gh ly so ph is ti cat ed ,” an d th e ad jus tm en t is

“ pr op er whe n th e of

fen se co nd uc t, vi ewed as a who le

, was no ta bl y m or e in tri cat e th an

th at of th e ga rd en -v ari et y of fen se .” Uni te d St at es v. No rw oo d

, 77 4 F.3 d 47 6, 48 0 (8 th

Ci r. 20 14 ) (p er cu ria m ) (b rack et s an d in te rn al q u o ta ti on m ark s om it te d)

. “ [T]he

so ph is ti cat io n o f th e o ffen se co nd uc t is ass oc ia te d wi th th e m ean s o f rep et it io n, t he

co or di na ti on req ui red to carr y ou t th e rep eat ed co nd uc t, an d th e nu m be r of rep et it io ns

or le ng th of ti m e ov er whi ch th e sc he m e to ok pl ace.” Uni te d St at es v. La ws , 81 9 F.3 d

38 8, 3 93 (8t h C ir. 2 01 6)

.

Gay e arg ue s th at hi s of

fen se di d no t in vo lv e so ph is ti cat e d mea n s , be cau se it

am ou nt ed on ly to “ st eal in g acco un t nu m be rs ( o f t e n fro m so ci al m ed ia ),” “ crea ti ng

fak e ch eck s, ” t a k i n g th os e ch eck s to a ba nk

, an d de po si ti ng th em in to co

co ns pi rat or s’ pe rs on al acco un ts

. He arg ue s th a t an y ot he r cri m in al co ul d ha ve

co m m it te d t hi s fr au d, an d t ha t t he off en se was “ cru de an d p ro sa ic .”

Gay e un de rs ta te s th e so ph is ti cat io n of hi s wor k. He was em br oi le d in a sc he m e

in vo lv in g ov er 15 00 frau du le n t t r a n s act io ns an d m or e th an 50 0 pa rti ci pa nt s th at

-1 3-pe rs is te d fo r ei gh t y ears

. Fo r th e co ns pi racy to su ccee d as lo ng as it di d, th e sc he m e

req ui red “ recr ui ti ng ot he rs so as to av oi d de te ct io n,” No rw oo d

, 77 4 F.3 d at 48 0,

“ co or di na ti o n a n d pl an ni ng ,” Uni te d St at es v. Bis tr up , 44 9 F.3 d 87 3, 88 3 (8 th Ci r.

20 06 ), a n d a “v as t ne two rk of co co ns pi rat or s to carr y ou t th e sc he m e’s nu m ero us

st ep s.” Uni te d St at es v. Jen ki ns -W at ts

, 57 4 F.3 d 95 0, 96 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). The co ur t

di d n ot cle arl y

err i n a pp lying th e in crea se

.

7.

In hi s fin al ch al le ng e, Gay e co nt en ds th a t h i s s e nt en ce of 14 4 m on th s is

su bs ta nt iv el y un re a s o n a bl e. W e rev ie w th e reas on ab le ne ss of a se nt en ce un de r a

de fere nt ia l ab us e-o f-d is cret io n st an da rd

, Gal l v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2 U.S. 38

, 51
(2 00 7)

, an d we pr es um e th at a se nt en ce wit hi n th e a d v i s or y gu id el in e ran ge is

reas on ab le

. Se e Hemsh er , 89 3 F .3d at 5 35

.

Gay e’s so le co nt en ti on is th at th e di st ric t co ur t fai le d to acco rd pr op er weig ht

un de r 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a)( 6) to th e ne ed to av oi d se nt en ci ng di sp ari t i es am on g

si m il a r l y s i t u at ed de fen da nt s. He no te s th at m an y of hi s co -co ns pi rat or s were

se nt en ced to te rm s of 3 to 13 6 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t, an d he arg ue s t h at hi s 14 4-

m on th se nt en ce crea te d a n un warra nt ed se nt en ci ng di sp ari ty. Bu t “ [t]he st at ut or y

di rect io n to av oi d un warra n t e d di sp ari ti es am on g de fen da nt s

. . . refe rs to na ti on al

di sp ari ti es , no t di ffer en ces am on g co -co ns pi rat or s, so [Gay e’s] arg um en t fo un de rs on

a m is ta ke n pr em is e.” Uni te d St at es v. Pier re , 87 0 F.3 d 84 5, 85 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). In

an y ev en t, Gay e ha s no t sh own th at he an d an y of th es e co -co ns pi rat or s were si m il arl y

si tu at ed

. The di st ric t co ur t fo u n d “s p eci fic al ly th at th ere is no un warra nt ed

se nt en ci ng di sp ari ty,” an d th at 14 4 m on th s was “an ap pr op ria te pl acement gi ve n

se nt en ces gi ve n to co de fen da nt s in th is cas e a n d i n ot he r si m il ar cas es .” The co ur t

di d n ot ab us e it s d is cret io n, s o we a ffi rm Gay e’s se nt en ce.

-1 4-B.

1.

Fi ll ie rai se s se ve n cl ai m s of erro r. Fi rs t, he ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t’s lo ss

cal cu la ti on

. The di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de d th at Fi ll ie was res po ns ib le fo r $7 70 ,55 1.0 8

in act ua l lo ss —a fig ur e gl ean ed fro m an ot he r ch art pr ep ared by Dete ct iv e Mo or e an d

Sp eci al Agen t Ko rp el a. Fil li e d is pu te s t hi s fi gu re.

Fi ll ie co nt e n d s th at th ere was in su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to pr ov e by a

pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce th at th e lo ss cau se d by hi s co -co ns pi rat or s was

reas on ab ly fo res eeab le to hi m

. Bu t th e ev id en ce te nd ed to sh ow th at Fi ll ie

, li ke Gay e,

ha d ex te ns iv e kn owl ed ge of ho w th e sc he m e op erat ed an d was de ep ly in vo lv ed in it s

op erat io ns

. Fi ll ie pa rti ci pa te d in th e sc he m e fro m 20 07 to 20 13

, ho st ed th e m eet in gs

whe re hi s co -co ns pi rat or s di sc us se d di st rib ut in g pr of it s, an d se rv ed as bo th a ru nn er

an d a m an uf

act ur er. On th is reco rd

, it was no t cl earl y erro ne ou s to co nc lu de th at th e

tra ns act io ns of Fi ll ie ’s co -co ns pi rat or s were reaso na bl y fo res eeab le to hi m

. The co ur t

pr op erl y he ld Fi ll e res po ns ib l e f o r t h e fu ll am ou nt of lo ss on th e go ve rn m en t’s

sc he du le

.

2.

Fi ll ie co nt en ds th at th e di st ric t co ur t cl earl y erre d in cal cu la ti ng th e nu m be r of

vi ct im s in vo lv ed in hi s of fen se

. The gu id el in es pr ov id e fo r a two -le ve l in crea se if th e

of fen se “ in vo lv ed 10 or m or e vi ct im s.” USSG § 2B 1.1 (b )(2 )(A)(i ). A “ vi ct im ” is

“ an y pe rs on ,” in cl ud in g a co rp or at io n, co m pa ny, as so ci at io n, or fir m , “ who su st ai ne d

an y pa rt o f th e act ua l l os s.” USS G § 2 B1 .1, co m m en t. (n .1).

Fi ll ie co nt en ds th at he i s r e s po ns ib le on ly fo r vi ct im s who su ffer ed act ua l

lo ss es as a res ul t of th e tra ns act io ns in whi ch Fi ll ie pe rs on al ly pa rti ci pa te d. On th is

-1 5-vi ew, he co un ts se ve n (n ot te n) vi ct im s who se lo ss es he cau se d. Bu t un de r rel ev an t

co nd uc t pr in ci pl es , a se nt en ci ng co ur t m us t al so in cl ud e th os e vi ct im s who su ffer ed

pe cu ni ary lo ss as a res ul t of act s ta k e n b y o t h e r s in th e joi nt ly un de rta ke n cri m in al

act iv it y

. USSG § 1B 1.3 (a)( 1) (B). As we ha ve co nc lu de d th at Fi ll ie reas on ab ly co ul d

ha ve fo res een th e lo ss at tri bu te d to th es e vi ct im s, it fo ll ows th at he reas on ab ly co ul d

ha ve fo res een th at th es e vi ct ims wou ld su ffer th e lo ss flo win g fro m th e co ns pi racy.

The co ur t p ro pe rly app li ed th e in crea se

.

3.

Fi ll e ne xt arg ue s t ha t t he di st ric t co ur t cl earl y erre d by ap pl y in g a th ree- le ve l

i n c r e a se un de r USSG § 3B 1.1 (b ) fo r Fi ll ie ’s r ol e as a m an ag er or su pe rv is or o f t h e

sc he m e. Sev eral fact or s are rel ev an t to de te rm in in g whe th er a th ree- le ve l ad jus tm en t

is warra nt ed : th e ex erci se of de ci si on m ak in g au th or it y , th e na tu re of pa rti ci pa ti on in

th e co m m is si on of

th e o ffen se , th e rec ru it m en t o f acco m pl ic es , t he cl ai m ed rig ht to

a la rg er sh are of th e fru it s of th e cri m e, th e de g r e e of pa rti ci pa ti on in pl an ni ng or

or ga ni zi ng th e of

fen se , th e na tu re an d sc op e of th e il le ga l act iv it y , an d th e de gr ee of

co nt ro l an d a ut ho rit y

ex erci se d o ve r ot he rs . USSG § 3 B1 .1, co m m en t. (n .4).

The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at a th ree- le ve l in crea se was ap pr op ria te

b e c a u se “ th ere [was ] so m e le ve l of or ga ni zat io n on th e pa rt of Mr. Fi ll ie ,” bu t th e

co ur t di d no t “ co ns id er hi m to be at th e le ve l of Mr. Gay e in te rm s of be in g a le ad er.”

The reco rd su pp or ts th is fin di ng

. The ev id en ce te nd ed to sh ow th at Fi ll ie ’s res id en ce

w a s a m ajor hu b of th e frau du le nt sc he m e an d th at he or ga ni zed ot he r pa rti ci p a n t s

. Dete ct iv e Mo or e te s t ifi ed reg ard in g su rv ei ll an ce co nd uc te d at Fi ll ie ’s ho m e,

ex pl ai ni ng th at la w en fo rcem en t ob se rv ed Fi ll ie ’s co -co ns pi rat or s go in g to an d fro m

Fi ll ie ’s ho m e be fo re an d aft er th e frau du le nt tra ns act io ns

. Fi ll ie al so ho st ed m eet in gs

wit h hi s co -co ns pi rat or s whe re th ey di sc us se d lo gi st ic s of th e sc he m e an d di st rib ut in g

pr of it s. Fi ll ie ’s ro le as a m an uf act ur er ga ve hi m a c e nt ral ro le in th e of fen se , as

wit ho ut hi m

th e sc he m e co ul d no t pe rs is t. Co ns id eri ng th e fact or s de sc rib ed in th e

-1 6-co m

m en ta ry to § 3B 1.1

, we co nc l u de th at th ere was no cl ear erro r in ap pl y in g th e

ad jus tm en t.

4.

Fi ll ie al so ch al le ng es th e two -le ve l in crea se fo r so ph is ti cat ed mea ns un de r

USSG § 2B 1.1 (b )( 1 0 ) (C). He co nt en ds th at hi s of fen se di d no t ex ceed th e ga rd en

va rie ty ba nk frau d bec au se he di d on ly th e “ ba re m in im um ne ces sa ry to co m

m it th e

of fen se ”—c reat e fal se ch eck s an d he lp cas h th em —wi th ou t en ga gi ng in act iv it y th at

was ei th er in tri cat e or co m pl ex

. Thi s arg um en t i s s u b s t a n t i al ly th e sa m e as th e

arg um en t ad va nc ed by Gay e, an d we reject it fo r th e sa m e reas on s. Se e su pr a

se ct io n II .A.6.

5.

Fi ll i e ne xt ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t’s cal cu la ti on of hi s cri m in al hi st or y

sc or e. The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at Fi ll ie ha d ni ne te en cri m in al hi st or y po in ts

, whi ch pl aced hi m in cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y VI. Fi ll ie co nt en ds

, ho wev er, th at th e

co ur t erre d by as se s s i n g two cri m in al hi st or y po in ts fo r each of th e fo ll owi ng

co nv ic ti on s: (1 ) a 20 11 co nv ic ti on fo r ch eck fo rg ery, (2 ) a 20 11 co nv ic ti on fo r fif th

de gr ee as sa ul t, (3 ) a 20 13 co nv ic ti on fo r se co nd -d eg ree refu sa l to su bm it to ch em ic al

te st in g, an d (4 ) a 20 14 co nv ic ti on fo r dr iv in g un de r th e in flu e n c e. On th is vi ew,

Fi ll ie ’s to ta l cri m in al hi st or y sc or e wou ld be 11

, pl aci ng hi m in cri mina l hi st or y

cat eg or y V.

Fi ll ie ’s co nv ic ti on fo r ch eck fo rg ery in v o l ve d an at te m pt to ne go ti at e a

co un te rfei t chec k on Ju ly 24

, 20 09

, at TCF Ban k. Fi ll ie cl ai m s th at th e go ve rn m en t

in cl ud ed th is co un te rfei t ch eck on Fi ll ie ’s lo ss sc he du le as pa rt of hi s in vo lv em en t in

th e in st an t of

fen se

. Bec au se cri m in al hi st or y po in ts are no t as si gn ed to se nt en ces fo r

“ co nd uc t th at is pa rt of th e in st an t of fen se ,” USSG § 4A1 .2, co m m en t. (n .1); se e

-1 7-USSG § 4A1 .1, Fi ll ie arg ue s th at he sh ou ld no t h a v e r e c ei ve d an y po in ts fo r th e

ch eck fo rg ery co nv ic ti on

. Fi ll ie ’s lo ss sc he du le

, ho wev er, d i d n o t in cl ud e th e

co m pl ai ne d- of ch eck

, an d th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t rel y on th e ch eck in arri vi ng at it s

lo ss fin di ng s. Th e d i s t r ic t co ur t th eref or e di d no t err in as si gn in g cri m in al hi st or y

po in ts for th is co nv ic ti on

.

Fi ll ie arg ue s in th e al te rn at iv e th at he sh ou ld ha ve rece iv ed on ly on e cri m in al

hi st or y po in t fo r th e ch eck fo rg ery co nv ic ti on , r a t h e r th an two po in ts

, be cau se he

se rv ed on ly fif

ty da y s in jail

. Bu t “ cri m in al hi st or y po in ts are ba se d on th e se nt en ce

pr on ou nc ed

, no t th e le ng th of ti m e act ua ll y se rv ed .” USSG § 4A1 .2, co m m en t. (n .2).

Fi ll ie was se nt en ced to 12 0 da y s, so th e di st ric t co ur t pr op erl y as si gn ed th e co nv ic ti on

two po in ts

. Se e USSG § 4 A1.1 (b ).

Bec au se th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t err in ad di ng two cri m in al hi st or y po in ts fo r

th e ch eck fo rg ery co nv ic ti on , we ne ed no t ad dr es s Fi ll ie ’s ch al le ng es to th e cri m in al

hi st or y po i n t s a ss es se d on th e ot he r th ree co nv ic ti on s: reg ard le ss of th e nu m be r of

po in ts as si gn e d to th e ot he r co nv ic ti on s, Fi ll ie ’s cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y rem ai ns

cat eg or y VI.

6.

Fi ll ie ne xt co nt en ds th at hi s se nt en c e i s s ub st an ti ve ly un reas on ab le

, bu t he

ap pe ars to ba se th is arg um en t la r g e l y on hi s vi ew th at th e co ur t sh ou ld no t ha ve

ap pl ie d th e ch al le ng ed in crea se s un de r th e gu id el in es

. Pro pe rly ca lc ul at ed , F il li e’s

gu id el in e ran ge fo r th e co ns pi racy offen se was 1 10 to 13 7 m on th s, ba se d on a to ta l

of fen se le ve l of 25 an d a cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y VI. The co ur t se nt en ced Fi ll ie to

th e bo tt om of th e ran ge —1 10 m on th s— fo r th at co ns pi racy co un t, a n d a d d e d a

co ns ecu ti ve se nt en ce of 24 m on th s for aid in g and ab et ti ng ag gr av at ed id en ti ty th eft

as req ui red un de r 18 U.S.C. § 10 28 A(a)(1 ). In reac hi ng th is se nt en ce, th e di st ric t

co ur t sp eci fic al ly ack no wled ge d Fi ll ie ’s arg um en ts in m it ig at io n an d co ns id ered th e

-1 8-se rio us ne ss of th e of fen se an d th e le ng th of Fi ll i e’s in vo lv em en t in th e sc he m e. In

li gh t of th e co ur t’s ex pl an at io n, we se e no ab us e of di sc re t i o n i n t he se nt en ce

im po se d.

7.

Fi na ll y , Fi ll ie a pp eal s th e di st ric t co ur t’s res ti tu ti on or de r, arg ui ng th at th e

am ou nt of res ti tu ti on or de red ($ 77 0,5 51 .08 ) sh ou ld no t ha v e e x c eed ed th e am ou nt

ag reed up on in Fi ll ie ’s pl ea ag reem en t ($ 48 1,9 29 .17 ). “ W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s

d e c i si on to or de r res ti tu ti on fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n an d it s un de rlyin g fact

de te rm in at io ns fo r cl ear erro r.” U n i t ed St at es v. Gre

go ir e , 63 8 F.3 d 96 2, 97 3 (8 th

Ci r. 20 11 ).

Fi ll ie ag rees th at th e Man da to ry Vict im s Res ti tu ti on Act, 18 U.S.C. § 36 63 A,

au th or iz ed th e d i s tri ct co ur t to or de r res ti tu ti on

. Sect io n 36 63 A pr ov id es th at a

se nt en ci ng co ur t “ sh al l or de r” a de fen da nt co nv ic te d of “ an of fen se ag ai ns t pr op ert y

un de r th is ti tl e,

. . . in cl ud in g an y of fen se co m

m i tt ed by frau d or de cei t[,]” to pa y

res ti tu ti on to a “ vi ct im of th e of fen se .” 18 U.S.C. § 36 63 A(a)(1 ), (c)( 1) (A)(i i). “ [I]n

th e cas e of an of

fen se th at in vo lv es as an el em en t a sc he m e, co ns pi racy, or pa tt ern of

cr im in al act iv it y ,” a “ vi ct im ” in cl ud es “ an y pe rs on di rect ly ha rm ed by th e de fen da nt ’s

cri m i n a l c o n d u c t in th e co ur se of th e sc he m e, co ns pi racy, or pa tt ern .” Id

. § 36 63 A(a)(2 ). Fi ll ie pl ead ed gu il ty to co ns pi racy to co m m it ba nk frau d, an of

fen se

th at ha s as an el em en t a co ns pi racy, so t he co ur t was au th or iz ed to ord er re st it ut io n

to vi ct im s of th at co ns pi racy. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Far ri ng to n , 49 9 F.3 d 85 4, 86 0- 61
(8 th Ci r. 20 07 ); se e al

so Uni te d St at es v. Ran d

, 40 3 F.3 d 48 9, 49 5- 96 (7 th Ci r. 20 05 ).

Fi ll ie co nt en ds th at th e co ur t sh ou ld no t ha ve ex ceed ed th e am ou nt of

res ti tu ti on ag reed up on in Fi ll ie ’s pl ea ag reem en t, bu t th is arg um en t is un av ai li ng fo r

two reas on s. Fi rs t, no t h in g in th e te xt of th e Man da to ry Vict im s Res ti tu ti on Act

req ui res th e co ur t to li m it it s or de r of res ti tu ti on t o a n a mo u n t ag reed up on by th e

-1 9-pa rti es , an d th e pa rti es ’ pl ea ag reem en t was no t bi nd in g on th e di st ric t co ur t. Seco nd

,

be fo r e s e n t e n c in g, Fi ll ie ob jecte d to th e am ou nt of res ti tu ti on li st ed in hi s pl ea

ag reem en t, an d th e di st ric t co ur t p e r m it te d Fi ll ie to arg ue th at he sh ou ld be

res po ns ib le fo r a lo wer am ou nt

. Fi ll ie th eref or e rep ud ia te d th e res ti tu ti on st ip ul at io n

be fo re s en te nc in g, an d t he co ur t wo ul d hav e be en free to di sr eg ard th e fi gu re i n t he
pl ea ag reem en t ev en if it were or di na ril y bi nd in g. Hav in g co nc lu de d th at th e act ua l

lo ss su ffer ed by th e vi ct im s of th e sc he m e was $7 70 ,55 1.0 8, th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t

cl earl y err b y ord eri ng Fil li e to pa y

res ti tu ti on in th e sa m e am ou nt

.

C.

Su m os o’s lo ne arg um en t on ap pe al is th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in cal cu la ti ng

th e am ou nt of lo ss at tri bu te d to hi m

. Bas ed on Su m os o’s in vo l v e ment in th e

co ns pi racy fro m 20 07 to 20 13

, th e co ur t fo un d th at he was res po ns ib le fo r
$7 70 ,65 1

. 0 8 i n act ua l lo ss , an d in crea se d hi s of fen se le ve l by fo ur te en le ve ls

. Se e USSG § 2B 1.1 (b )(1 )(H).

Su m os o co nt en ds th at he sh ou ld no t ha ve be en he ld res po ns ib le fo r lo ss es th at

oc cu rred du rin g pe rio ds of ti m e whe n Su m os o was no t li vi ng in th e Twin Ci ti es

. The

go ve rn m en t arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t pr op erl y he ld Su m os o acco un ta bl e fo r lo ss

du rin g th is ti m e, be cau se Su m os o ne ve r affi rm at iv el y wit hd rew fro m th e co ns pi racy.

Und er the sen te nc in g g ui de li ne s, a c on sp ira cy de fen da nt is res po ns ib le for rel ev an t

co n d u c t

, in cl ud in g reas on ab ly fo res eeab le act s of ot he rs , “ un le ss an d un ti l he

wit hd raws fro m th e co ns pi racy in a cco rd an ce wi th th e co m m on -la w r ul e.” Sp ot te d

Elk

, 54 8 F.3 d at 6 7 7

. W he th er Su m os o was pr op erl y he ld acco un ta bl e fo r
$7 70 ,65 1.0 8 in act ua l lo ss th eref or e tu rn s on (1 ) hi s un de rs ta nd in g of th e sc op e of th e

co ns p i r acy an d whe th er hi s co -co ns pi rat or s’ act s were fo res eeab le to hi m , an d (2 )

whe th er h e wit hd rew fro m th e co ns pi racy.

-2 0-Th e e v id en ce te nd ed to sh ow th at Su m os o un de rs to od th e fu ll ex te nt of t h e

b a n k f rau d sc he m e. As th e di st ric t co ur t ex pl ai ne d, Su m os o “ pr ov id [ed ] vi ct i m

acco un t in fo rm at io n,” “ recr ui t[e d] ru nn ers , ob ta in [ed ] co un te rfei t ch eck s fro m th e

m an uf act ur ers , pr ov id [ed ] ch eck s to ru nn e r s , an d tra ns po rt[ ed ] ru nn ers .” He al so

at te nd ed m eet in gs to di sc us s lo gi st ic s an d pr of it -s ha rin g wit h Gay e, Fi ll ie

, an d ot he r

co -co ns pi rat or s. The re was su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to su pp or t a fin di ng th at th e act iv it ie s

o f Su m os o’s co -co ns pi rat or s were reas on ab ly fo res eeab le to hi m , gi ve n hi s

un de rs ta nd in g of th e na tu re of th e sc he m e. The lo ss es as so ci at ed wit h th es e act iv it ie s

are th eref or e at tri bu ta bl e to Su m os o, un le ss he wit hd rew fro m th e co ns pi racy du rin g

th e p eri od s wh en he was l iv in g o ut si de th e Twin Cit ie s.

Und er th e co m

m on -la w rul e, a d efen da nt wit hd raws fro m a co ns pi racy when

he ta ke s “aff

irmativ e act io n by m ak in g a cl ean br eas t to th e au th or it ie s or by

co m m un ic a t in g hi s wit hd rawal in a m an ne r reas on ab ly cal cu la te d to reac h hi s

co co ns pi rat or s.” Uni te d St at es v. Ort eg a , 75 0 F.3 d 10 20

, 10 24 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 )
(in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

. “ A sh owi ng of no th in g m or e th an th at th e

de fen da nt ha s c eas ed act iv it ie s is no t su ffi ci en t to es ta bl is h a wit hd rawal fro m th e

co ns pi racy.” Id

. (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

. The de fen da nt be ars th e bu rd en

of de m on st rat in g wit hd rawal

, id

. , y et Su m os o pr es en te d no ev id en ce th at he to ok

st ep s t o e nd hi s i nv ol ve m en t i n t he co ns pi racy when he was l iv in g i n No rth Dako ta

or so ut he rn Mi nn es o t a

. N o r di d he cl ai m th at he no ti fie d au th or it ie s of hi s

in vo lv em en t i n t he co ns pi racy when he lef t t he Twin Cit ie s ar ea.

The di str ic t co ur

t ac know le dg ed th at “ th e reco rd de m on st rat es th at Mr. Su m os o

was so m et im es in an d ou t of th e co ns pi racy,” bu t ul ti m at el y co nc lu de d th at “ th ere is

su ffi ci en t fact ua l ba si s fo r th e ti m e th at Mr. Su m os o was in vo lv ed in th is co ns pi racy,”

an d th at “ fo r th e le ng th of ti m e th at th e go ve rn m en t has de m on st rat ed

, he di d pl ay a

su bs ta nt ia l ro le .” Thi s co nc lu si on was no t cl earl y erro ne ou s. Ano th er ch art pr ep ared
by the in ve st ig at or s sh owe d th at Su m os o join ed th e co ns pi racy in Aug us t 2 00 7 a nd

th at th e co ns pi racy co nt in ue d un ti l Sep te m be r 20 13

. W it ho ut ev id en ce of affi rm at iv e

-2 1-wit hd rawal

, it rema i n e d f or es eeab le to Su m os o th at hi s co -co ns pi rat or s wou ld

co nt in ue th e ba nk frau d sc he m e wit ho ut hi s as si st an ce. The co ur t th eref or e pr op erl y

in crea se d S um os o’s o ffen se lev el by fou rte en lev el s.

* * *

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, t he jud gm en ts of t he di st ric t co ur t ar e aff irmed.

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

-2 2-