FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T FEB 23, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 77 1 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 :1 0- cr-6 03 11 -DMM -2 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us ALBERT ANTHONY ANDRULONIS, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 93 9 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 :1 0- cr-6 03 11 -DMM -1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs usJI MM Y LEE THEODORE, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal s fr om

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Feb ru ary 23 , 20 12 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, MARC US, an d M ARTIN, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: App el la nt s Al be rt An th on y Andru lo ni s an d J imm

y Lee The od or e ap pe al th ei r 13 2- m on th an d 1 75 -m on th to ta l s en te nc es , res pe ct iv el y . They bo th pl ed gu il ty to o ne co un t o f wire frau d, i n v io la ti on of 1 8 U.S.C. § 13 43 , on e co un t o f un au th or iz edus e o f a d eb itcard , invi ol at io n o f 18 U.S.C. § 1 02 9( a)(2 ), an d o ne co un t o f ag gr av at edid en ti ty the ft, i n v io la ti on of 1 8 U.S.C. § 10 28 A(a)(1 ). On ap pe al , Andru lo ni s fi rs t ch al le ng es th e im po si ti on of asen te nc e en ha nc em en t fo r cau si ng a lo ss be twee n $ 40 0,0 00 an d $ 1,0 00 ,00 0. He ar gu es th at th e lo ss es fro m

Ch as e Ban k c au se d b y

Theo do re ca nn otbe att rib ut edto hi m , th e ex pe ns es fro m

Hol y Cro ss Hos pi ta l ca nn otbe att rib ut edto hi m , andth e ex pe ns es fro m Hol y Cro ss Hos pi ta l wer e n otreas on ab ly fores eeab le . Andru lo ni s n ex t arg ue s tha t the di stric t co urt i nc orrect ly app li eda so ph is ti cat edm ean s 2en ha nc em en t t o h is gu id el in e ran ge be cau se he was i nv ol ve d i n arun -o f-the -m il l

frau d s ch em e th atin vo lv edno sp eci al pl an ni ng or a tt em ptat c on ceal m en t. Fi na ll y , Andru lo ni s ar gu es th atth e d is tri ctco urt i nc orrect ly calcu late d t he nu m be r of vi ct im s, b ecau se itin cl ud edvi ct im s wh o wer e n otco nn ect edto Andru lo ni s o r di d n otsu st ai n a ny actu al lo ss . The od or e, in tu rn , arg ue s tha t v ari ou s s en te nc in g e nh an cem en ts were in co rrec tl y

in cl ud edinhi s g ui de li ne ran ge , andth athi s s en te nc e is subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le . Howev er, The od or e si gn edanap pe al waiv er tha t the go ve rn m en t ur ge s u s t o e nf

or ce b efo re re ach in g t he m eri ts of h is cla im s. I. Andru lo ni s fi rs t ch al le ng es th e d is tri ctco urt’s d et erm in at io n t ha t the am ou nt of lo ss was b etween$4 00 ,00 0 a nd$1 ,00 0,0 00 .

“ The di st ric t co urt’s d et erm in at io n o f lo ss is rev ie wedforcle ar erro r.” Uni te d Sta tes v. Ba rr in gt on , 64 8 F .3d11 78 , 11 97 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ), cer t. d en ie d , -- - S. Ct . ----, (No . 11 -7 63 5) (Ja n. 0 9, 2 01 2) . A dis tri ctco urt’s i nt erp ret at io n o f th e se nt en ci ng gu id el in es is rev ie wed de no vo . Id. A fail ur e to ob ject t o t he factua l al le ga ti on s i n t he PSI wi th sp eci fic it y an d c la rit y

wil l b e d eem edanadm is si on by th e d efen da nt . Uni te d Sta tes v. Ben ne tt , 47 2 F .3d82 5, 8 33 -3 4 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 6) . Los s i s the gre at er o f th e actua l l os s o r in te nd edlo ss . U.S.S.G. § 2B 1.1 3co m

m en t. (n . 3(A)) . Actu al lo ss is th e rea so nabl y for es eeab le pe cu ni ary ha rm th at res ul te d fr om

th e o ffen se . U.S.S.G. § 2B 1.1 co m m en t. (n . 3(A)( i)) . Int en de d l os s is th e p ecu ni ary ha rm

th atwas i nt en de d t o re su ltfro m th e o ffen se , eve n i f th e h arm was im po ss ib le or u nl ik el y

to oc cu r. U.S.S.G. § 2B 1.1 co m m en t. (n . 3(A)( ii )). Pecu ni ary ha rm

is a ha rm th atis read il y

m eas ur ab le inm on ey , anddo es no t in cl ud e th in gs su chas e m ot io na l d is tre ss an d h arm to rep ut at io n. U.S.S.G. § 2 B1 .1 co m

m en t. (n . 3(A)( ii i)) . A reaso nabl y for es eeab le pe cu ni ary ha rm is on e th atth e d efen dantkn ew or reas on ab ly sho ul d h av e kno wn was a po te nt ia l re su ltof th e o ffen se . U.S.S.G. § 2B 1.1 co m m en t. (n . 3(A)( iv )). In te res t, fi na nc e ch arg es , la te fees , pen al ti es , andot he r si m il ar co st s ar e sp eci fic al ly excl ud edfro m a lo ss cal cu la ti on . U.S.S.G. § 2B 1.1 co m m en t. (n . 3(D)( I)). The go ve rn m en t m

us t s up po rt i ts lo ss cal cu lati on with re li ab le an d s pe ci fic ev id en ce; ho wev er, a s en te nc in g c ou rt d oe s n otne edto m ak e a p reci se de te rm in at io n o f lo ss , bu t o nl y a reas on ab le est im at e g iv enth e av ai labl e in fo rm at io n. Bar ri ng to n , 64 8 F .3dat 1 19 7. A parti ci pa ntina co ns pi racy m ay be he ldres po ns ib le forth e lo ss es res ul ti ng fro m

th e rea so nabl y

for es eeab le act s o f co -co ns pi rat or s i n fu rth eran ce o f th e co ns pi racy. Uni te d Sta tes v. Ma te os , 62 3 F .3d13 50 , 13 70 (11 thCir . 20 10 ), cer t. d en ie d, Alr ar ezv. Uni te d Sta tes , l1 31 S. Ct. 1 54 0 (2 01 1) ; se e a ls o U.S.S.G. § 41B 1.3 (a)( 1) (B) (s tati ng th at , inth e cas e o f joi nt ly und ert ak encri m in al act iv it y , all

reas on ab ly fores eeab le act s an d o m is si on s o f ot he rs infurth eran ce o f th e cri m in al act iv ity canco un t t owa rd s o ffen se ch arac te ris ti cs ). A court m us t fi rs t m ak e in di vi du al iz edfin di ng s co nc ern in g t he sco pe of t he de fen da nt ’s cri m in al act iv it y , an d t he n m ay

co ns id er al l re as on ab ly fores eeab le act s o f ot he rs inth e joi nt ly un de rtake n c riminal act iv it y . Id. A fail ur e to m ak e su chin di vi du al iz edfin di ng s do es no t re qu ire us to va cat e a s en te nc e if th e rec or d s up po rts th e d is tri ctco urt’s of fen se co nduc t d et erm in at io n. Uni te d Sta tes v. Petri e , 30 2 F .3d12 80 , 12 90 (11 th Ci r. 20 02 ). Whi le th e d is tri ctco urt d idno t m ak e anin di vi du al iz edfin di ng att rib ut in g th e act iv it ie s o f And ru lo ni s’s co -d efen da nt s t o h im , th e rec or d i s m or e th an su ffi ci en t t o s up po rt the di st ric t co urt’s d et erm in at io ns . Andru lo ni s, Th eo do re, an d t he ot he r co ns pi rat or s wo rk edclo se ly to ca rry ou t the ir i de nt it y

th eftsch em e. St eal in g p at ie ntin fo rm at io n fr om Hol y Cro ss Hos pi ta l was a reas on ab ly fo res eeab le actof t ha t s ch em e in furth eran ce o f th e co ns pi racy, as was us in g t he st ol enin fo rm at io n t o c au se lo ss es to va rio us Ch as e Ban k a cco un ts . Accor di ng ly, we co nc lu de th atth e act iv it ie s o f th e co ns pi racy, andth e lo ss es su st ai ne d b y Hol y Cro ss Hos pi ta l an d C ha se Ban k, wer e p ro pe rly attrib ut edto Andru lo ni s dur in g se nt en ci ng . 5Fi na ll y , gi ve n t he off en se co nduc t b efo re u s, we co nc lu de th atth e ex pe ns es in cu rredby H ol y

Cro ss Hos pi ta l wer e rea so nabl y for es eeab le . Accor di ng ly, we ho ldth atth e d is tri ctco urt co rrec tl y arri ve d a t the lo ss am ou ntan d t he ass oc ia te d gu id el in e en ha nc em en t. II. Andru lo ni s’s s eco ndch al le ng e is to th e so ph is ti cat edm ean s en hanc em en t ap pl ie d b y

th e d is tri ctco urt. W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s fi nd in g t ha t s op hi st ic at edm ean s wer e u se d fo r cl ear e rro r. Bar ri ng to n , 64 8 F .3dat 1 19 9. Th e so ph is ti cat edm ean s en ha nc em en t is ap pr op ria te foresp eci al ly com pl ex or e sp eci al ly int ric at e o ffen se co nduc t, du rin g e it he r ex ecu ti on or c on ceal m en t o f th e co nduc t. U.S.S.G. § 2 B1 .1 co m m en t. (n . 8(B )). Onl y

th e to ta li ty of th e sc he m e n eed s t o b e so ph is ti cat ed , no t each in di vi du al act io n. Bar ri ng to n , 64 8 F .3dat 1 19 9. Re pe ti ti ve an d c oo rd in at ed act iv it ie s b y

nu m ero us in di vi du al s u si ng so ph is ti cat edtec hn ol og y canjus ti fy

a so ph is ti cat edm ean s en ha nc em en t. Se e Uni te d Sta tes v. Gh er tl er , 60 5 F .3d12 56 , 12 67 -6 8 (1 1t h C ir. 2 01 0) . In Ghe rt le r , we st at edth atth e d efen da ntqu al ifi edfora so ph is ti cat edm ean s en ha nc em en t b ecau se he co nduc te d e xt en si ve res earc h t o d ev el op in si de in fo rm at io n t o fa ci li ta te a sc he m e to de frau d; us edun wit ti ng co ur ie rs to pi ckup 6an d d el iv er p ro ceed s o f hi s fr au ds to co nc eal th e sc he m e; for ge d fa ls e co m pa ny do cu m en ts an d i nt ern al nu m be rs ; an d u se d u nwi tt in g t hi rdpa rti es , des pi te ot he r ti m es m ak in g l it tl e o r no effo rt t o c on ceal hi s i de nt it y or f rau d. Id. Sim il arl y , in Uni te d Sta tes v. C

amp be ll , 49 1 F .3d13 06 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ), we he ldth ata so ph is ti cat edm ean s en ha nc em en t was ap pr op ria te be cau se th e d efen dantus ed cam pa ig n a cco un ts an d c red itcard s i ss ue d t o o th er p eo pl e to co nc eal cas h ex pe nd itur es an d c ov er h is tax frau d. Id. at 1 31 5. W e co nc lu de fro m

th e rec or d t ha t An drul on is an d Th eo do re d ev el op eda so ph is ti cat edsch em e to st eal id en ti ti es an d fr au du le nt ly obt ai n m on ey . They hi red th ree e m pl oyees i n t he he al th care fie ldto feedth em co nf id en ti al pa ti en t d at a. The y co m bi ne d tha t d at a with p ub li cl y av ai labl e in fo rm at io n tha t was su ffi ci en t t o de featCh as e Ban k’s s ecurit y m eas ur es . They crea te d n ew acc ou nt s i n t he vi ct im s’ na m es pri orto tra ns ferr in g andwithd rawi ng an y m on ey , to av oi d d et ect io n. Th e di st ric t co urt fo un d i t l ik el y th atth ey were al so work in g wi th anin si de r atCh as e Ban k. Th ey

att em pt edto hi de th ei r cal ls in to Ch as e Ban k b y m ak in g the ir p ho ne nu m be rs pri va te . They freque nt ly acces se d t he Ch as e Ban k web si te fro m a publ ic , rathe r th ana pe rs on al , com pu te r. Acco rd in gl y , we con cl ud e fro m th e rec or d t ha t th e d is tri ctco urt d idno t cl earl y err i n d et erm in in g t ha t thi s o ffen se co nduc t was co m m it te d t hr ou gh so ph is ti cat edm ean s. 7III.

Fi na ll y , Andru lo ni s ch al le ng es th e d is tri ctco urt’s d et erm in at io n t ha t m or e th an25 0 v ic ti m s wer e in vo lv edinhi s o ffen se co nduc t. W e rev ie w th e fac tu al fin di ng s fo r nu m be r of vi ct im s fo r cl ear e rro r. Se e Uni te d Sta tes v. Le e , 42 7 F .3d88 1, 8 92 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). W e h av e st at edth at , if a de fen da ntdo es no t o bjec t t o afactco nt ai ne d i n t he pro se cu ti on ’s factua l re ci ta ti on du rin g apl ea co ll oquy, tha t fa ctis de em edadm it te d. Se e Uni te d Sta tes v. S he lt on , 40 0 F .3d13 25 , 13 30 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ) (h ol di ng th atth ere was no erro r whe n a de fen da ntadm it te d t o p artof h is dru g quant it y en ha nc em en t dur in g apl ea co ll oquy, partdurin g s en te nc in g, an d m ad e n o o bjec ti on s t o the PSI). The go ve rn m en t s ta te d dur in g t he factua l p ro fferat the Ru le 11 he ari ng th at th ere wer e 3 10 in di vi du al vi ct im s. An drul on is ag reedto th e fac tu al pro ffer witho utob

jecti on . Accor di ng ly, Andru lo ni s i s b ou ndby the go ve rn m en t’s fa ctua l pr of fer. Si nc e th e p ro fferin cl ud ed31 0 v ic ti m s, we co nc lu de th atth e d is tri ctco urt di d n otcle arl y

err i n d et erm in in g t ha t the re were m or e th an25 0 v ic ti m s an d ap pl y in g t he ap pr op ria te gu id el in e en ha nc em en t. IV. W e rev ie w th e v al id it y

of asen te nc e ap pe al waiv er de no vo . Uni te d Sta tes v. Bus he rt , 99 7 F .2d13 43 , 13 52 (11 th Cir . 19 93 ). W e en fo rce asen te nc e ap pe al 8waiv er i f th e g ov ern m en t s ho ws ei th er “ (1 ) th e d is tri ctco urt s pe ci fic al ly

qu es ti on edth e d efen da ntco nc ern in g t he sen te nc e ap pe al waiv er dur in g t he Ru le 11 co ll oquy, or (2 ) itis m an ife st ly clearfro m th e rec or d t ha t the de fen dant ot he rwis e und ers to odth e fu ll si gn ifi can ce o f th e wai ve r.” Id. at 1 35 1. Where an ap pe al waiv er i s s pe ci fic al ly dis cu ss eddu rin g the Ru le 11 co ll oquy, w e h av e co ns is te nt ly enfo rcedth em , acco rd in g t o t he ir t erm s, wh enth e d is tri ctco urt sp eci fic al ly que st io ne d t he de fen da ntdu rin g t he pl ea co ll oquy abo utth e ap pe al waiv er, ad equa te ly exp la in edth e si gn ifi can ce o f th e ap pe al waiv er, an d c on firm ed th atth e d efen dantun de rs to odth e fu ll si gn ifi can ce o f th e ap pe al waiv er. Uni te d St at es v. Gri na rd

-Hen ry , 39 9 F .3d12 94 , 12 96 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). The reco rdde m on st rat es th atTheo do re’s ap pe al waiv er was sp eci fic al ly di sc us se d dur in g t he Ru le 11 co ll oquy. The di st ric t co urt i nf orm edTheo do re tha t he was g iv in g up h is rig htto ap pe al hi s s en te nc e unl es s i t ex ceed edth e st atut ory m ax im um or t he gu id el in e ran ge an d c on firm edhi s u nd ers ta nd in g o f th e wai ve r. The di st ric t co urt s pe ci fic al ly foundth atth e wai ve r was kn owi ng an d v ol un ta ry . Mo reo ve r, pe r th e te rm s o f th e ap pe al waiv er, The od or e can on ly app eal hi s se nt en ce i f itwas i n e xc es s o f th e st atut ory m ax im um , th e res ul t o f anup ward de pa rtu re o r va ria nc e, orif the go ve rn m en t ap pe al edth e se nt en ce. The di st ric t co urt i m po se d alo w-en d g ui de li ne sen te nc e withi n t he st atut ory m ax im um . The 9go ve rn m en t d idno t ap pe al th e se nt en ce. Thu s, Th eo do re ca nn otch al le ng e h is

se nt en ce o n app eal . Becau se Theo do re o nl y rai se s s en te nc in g i ss ue s o n app eal , we di sm is s h is ap pe al as b arre d b y th e ap pe al waiv er wi th ou t p ro ceed in g t o the m eri ts . DISMI SSED I N PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.

10