Opinion ID: 4574496
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The $1 Million Threshold

Text: Commentary Note 13(A) to money laundering guideline § 2B1.1, states that “[f]or purposes of [the gross receipts adjustment], the defendant shall be considered to have derived more than $1,000,000 in gross receipts if the gross receipts to the defendant individually, rather than to all participants, exceeded $1,000,000.” U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(17)(A) cmt. n.13(A) (emphasis added). Capps argues that we should remand to the District Court for clarification of inconsistent statements about whether he met the $1 million threshold on an individual basis. The government does not try to say that the District Court’s comments were clear but argues that the Court must have found that Capps met the threshold because “the loss in this case (which Capps was ordered to repay to Vanguard) is $2,137,580.81.” (Answering Br. at 21 n.4.) According to the government, “[t]here is no question that the ‘gross receipts’ in this case – not Capps’ personal receipts after dividing the 19 proceeds – was far over $1 million.” (Id.) Even if true, that assertion manages to explicitly avoid the relevant question. It ignores the requirement from the commentary that the threshold must be applied in terms of what Capps himself received, individually. The District Court’s statements did not answer the relevant question either. During sentencing, the Court said, “Mr. Capps himself admitted just now that he took approximately one half of [approximately $2 million] or a million dollars” (App. at 96) (emphasis added), and that Capps stole “almost over a million dollars, or receiving a million dollars,” (App. at 97) (emphasis added). Accordingly, we will remand so that the District Court can clarify whether the gross receipts that Capps received individually exceeded the milliondollar threshold.