Source: http://openjurist.org/143/f3d/1095/united-states-v-mccord-inc
Timestamp: 2015-02-27 12:04:30
Document Index: 289074550

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1001', '§ 2', '§ 1001', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 1031']

143 F3d 1095 United States v. McCord Inc | OpenJurist
143 F. 3d 1095 - United States v. McCord Inc	Home 143 f3d 1095 united states v. mccord inc
143 F3d 1095 United States v. McCord Inc 143 F.3d 1095
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff--Appellee,v.McCORD, INC.; Loyd E. McCord, Defendants--Appellants.
Nos. 97-3192, 97-3193.
Submitted Jan. 13, 1998.Decided May 7, 1998.
Loyd McCord is the president and sole shareholder of McCord, Inc., an interstate trucking company. A United States Department of Transportation ("DOT") investigation revealed that McCord, Inc., employees had been systematically falsifying truck driver duty status forms ("driver logs") to conceal non-compliance with DOT hours-of-service regulations. McCord and the company pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which prohibits the making of materially false statements in matters within the jurisdiction of federal departments and agencies. They appeal their sentences. The principal issue is whether the district court1 erred in applying the fivelevel sentencing enhancement in USSG § 2F1.1(b)(4)(A) for fraud offenses that involve "the conscious or reckless risk of serious bodily injury." We affirm.
Pursuant to written plea agreements, McCord and the company agreed to plead guilty to one-count informations charging violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. The district court withheld approval of the plea agreements until Presentence Investigation Reports were available. The government persuaded the probation office to recommend § 2F1.1(b)(4)(A) enhancements, which increased defendants' base offense levels from eight to thirteen. McCord and the company argued this was a breach of the plea agreements. At sentencing, the district court found the agreements ambiguous on this issue and rejected them, giving defendants an opportunity to withdraw their guilty pleas. McCord, acting for himself and the company, adhered to the guilty pleas, and the court proceeded with the sentencing hearing.2 After hearing evidence and argument, the district court imposed § 2F1.1(b)(4)(A) enhancements. The court sentenced McCord to twelve months in prison and two years supervised release. It imposed a fine of $15,000 on McCord and a $100,000 fine on the company, to be offset by payment of McCord's individual fine.
The § 2F1.1(b)(4)(A) Issue.
The Major Fraud Act of 1988 enacted 18 U.S.C. § 1031, which prohibits major procurement fraud against the United States. Pub.L.