FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT M ay 18, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 11561

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 4 - 0 0 1 4 2 - C R - OR L - 2 2 - DA B U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f- A p p e lle e , v ersu s J O S E R A M O S , J R ., D e fe n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea lfr om the U ni t ed S t ates D i stri ctC ou rt forthe M i ddl e D i s tri c tof F l ori da

_________________________ ( M ay 18, 2006) B efo re C A R N E S , W IL S O N an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: Jose R am os, Jr . pl ea ded g ui l ty to con spi ra cy t o rec ei ve, po ss es s, pass , utt er a nd publ i s h for ge d a nd a l t e r e d m one y or de r s w i th i nt e ntt o de f r aud i n vi ol a ti on of2

18 U . S . C . §§ 2, 37 1, and 5 00 , and t o n i ne subst anti ve coun t s of posse ss i ng forged a n d a lte r e d m o n e y o r d e r s in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § § 2 , 4 7 3 , a n d 5 0 0 . H e ap p e a ls the re sti tuti on partof hi s s ent ence rai si ng three i ss ues, ea ch of w hi ch i s forec l osed b y b in d in g p r e c e d e n t. R a m os ’ c ont e nti on tha tthe us e of c e rt a i n i nvoi c e s t o e s t abl i s h the a m ountof l o s s fo rr e s ti tu ti o n p u rp o s e s v i o l a t e s Cr a w fo r d v . W a s h i n g t o n , 5 4 1 U . S. 3 6 , 1 2 4 S. C t . 1354 ( 2004) , i s c ontr ary t o ourhol di ng i n U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C a nt e l l a no, 430 F . 3d 1 1 4 2 , 1 1 4 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . R a m o s ’ c o n te n tio n th a t a llo w in g aju d g e to m ak e fa c tf in d in g s n e c e s s ary to e s t abl i s h the a m ountof

r e s ti tuti on vi ol a t e s A ppr e ndi v. N e w J e r s e y , 530 U . S . 466, 120 S . C t . 2348 ( 2000) , orU ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . 220, 125 S . C t . 738 ( 2005) , i s c ontr ary t o ourhol di ng i n D ohr m a nn v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , ___ F . 3d ___, N o. 05- 13560, 2006 W L 623652 ( 11th C i r . M ar . 15, 2006) . T he thor ough a nd pe r s ua s i ve s uppl e m e nt a ll e tt e rbr i e f the gove rnm e ntf

i l e d i n thi s c a s e c onvi nc e s us th a t , e v e n i f

w e w e r e w r i ti n g o n ac l e a n s l a t e i n r e g ar d t o th i s i s s u e , c f . Fe d . R. A p p . P . 3 5 , th e D o h r m a n n d e c is io n is c o rr e c t. F i na l l y , R a m os ’ ar gum e nttha tU ni t e d S t at e s v. D i c ke r s on, 370 F . 3d 1330 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) , m e a n s in th e c a lc u la tio n o f th e a m o u n t o f

r e s titu tio n h e c a n o n ly b e h e ld r e s p o n s ib le fo rh is o w n c o n d u c t a n d n o t th a t o f h is c o - c o n s p ir a to r s is3

fore cl osed by U ni t ed S t ates v. A l as , 19 6 f. 3d 12 50 , 12 51 (11th C i r. 19 99 ), w hi ch he l d tha t“ c ons pi r a t or s ar e l i abl e fora l lof the a c t s a nd for e s e e abl e c ons e que nc e s of the conspi ra cy . ” I nd ee d, D i cker son i t se l f hel d thatthe am ou ntof re sti tuti on m ay i n cl u d e rel at ed co n d u ctfo r w h i ch th e d efen d an tw as n o tco n v i ct ed i f th e l o ss f lo w e d d ir e c tly f

r o m th e c o n s p ir a c y o rs c h e m e o f w h ic h h e w a s ap art. AF F I R ME D.