Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Talcum MARSH, III, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-02-04
Citations: 266 F. App'x 564
Docket Number: Nos. 06-50449, 06-50457
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Talcum MARSH, III, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: FARRIS and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and SANDOVAL , District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 266
Pages: 564–565

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Talcum MARSH, III, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 06-50449, 06-50457.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Jan. 11, 2008.
Filed Feb. 4, 2008.
Donald F. Gaffney, AUSA, USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, Michael J. Raphael, Esq., for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Ben Coleman, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: FARRIS and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and SANDOVAL , District Judge.
The Honorable Brian E. Sandoval, United States District Judge for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Talcum Marsh, III appeals from the district court's judgment sentencing him to a 262-month term of imprisonment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
The district court did not err in imposing a twenty-level enhancement for an intended loss amount of $18 million. See United States v. Tulaner, 512 F.3d 576, 578 (9th Cir.2008) ("[T]he full scope of the defendant's fraudulent conduct is taken into account when calculating the intended loss."); U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 (2005).
The district court's four-level enhancement of Marsh's sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(a) was proper because the evidence supports the district court's determination that Marsh was an organizer or leader. United States v. Garcia, 497 F.3d 964, 969-70 (9th Cir.2007); United States v. Avila, 95 F.3d 887, 889 (9th Cir.1996).
Because the district court adequately considered the factors identified in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the sentence imposed was reasonable. See Rita v. United States, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468-69, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.