Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demar Crozier WATSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-04-26
Citations: 687 F. App'x 420
Docket Number: No. 16-30677 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demar Crozier WATSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 687
Pages: 420–421

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demar Crozier WATSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-30677 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed April 26, 2017
Carol Mignonne Griffing, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Stephen Adger Glassell, Esq., Attorney, Shreveport, LA, for Defendant-Appellant
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Demar Watson appeals his sentence for theft concerning programs receiving federal funds. The district court sentenced him to 38 months of imprisonment, a three-year term of supervised release, and $397,255.68 in restitution. He contends that the court clearly erred by applying a two-level enhancement per U.S.S.G. § 2Bl.l(b)(10)(C) for an offense otherwise involving sophisticated means.
Watson transferred money from his employer's account to his personal account, opened a credit account with his supervisor's personal information, labeled the transactions as company expenses, and signed a blank company check to himself. His actions made it more difficult to detect the misappropriation, so the finding that the offense involved sophisticated means was plausible in light of the record as a whole and not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Valdez, 726 F.3d 684, 692, 695 (5th Cir. 2013).
The judgment is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir, R. 47.5.4.