Opinion ID: 857811
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: district court’s loss calculation

Text: The PSI stated that Defendant White joined the conspiracy on April 15, 2002 and was responsible for 328 false tax returns claiming $2,720,605 in fraudulently obtained refunds. Based on this loss amount, the PSI increased Defendant White’s base offense level by 18 levels, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(J). Defendant White objected to the PSI’s offense calculation, arguing that it incorrectly assessed his relevant conduct. Defendant White admitted he had provided addresses in Americus to Jones, Sr., removed refund checks from 5 Case: 12-14001 Date Filed: 04/11/2013 Page: 6 of 11 mailboxes, delivered refund checks to codefendant Wiley, arranged for Wiley to cash refund checks, and received portions of refund check proceeds. Defendant White also admitted that he participated in telephone conversations with Jones, Sr. about preparing false tax returns. Defendant White maintained, however, that he should not be held responsible for all the tax returns, but only those for which he was directly involved in the retrieval or negotiation of the refund checks. Defendant White offered to stipulate to 30 returns, for an intended loss amount of not more than $400,000 and an offense level of 14 under § 2B1.1(b). Defendant White also argued that he should not be held responsible for returns filed as early as April 15, 2002, given that the charged conspiracy did not begin until two years later. At sentencing, Defendant White reiterated his prior objections and also argued that, for sentencing purposes, the district court should find that there were in fact two conspiracies: one conspiracy involving refunds sent to addresses in the Atlanta area and another conspiracy involving refunds sent to addresses in Americus. Defendant White contended that he was unaware of the refunds sent to Atlanta-area addresses. The district court found that Defendant White joined the conspiracy on March 8, 2005, the date the false tax return bearing his name was filed, rather than the April 15, 2002 date set out in the PSI. The district court rejected the argument 6 Case: 12-14001 Date Filed: 04/11/2013 Page: 7 of 11 that there were two conspiracies, explaining, “That’s simply not what the plea has been in this case and that’s not what the evidence would indicate from what the Court has observed” and “simply because . . . some member of the conspiracy might carry out the conspiracy primarily in one area and others in another does not discount the fact that there was a conspiracy.” The district court concluded that Defendant White was accountable for all tax returns within the scope of the conspiracy after he joined it, even if he did not personally know about each one of them. Based on Defendant White’s date of entry on March 8, 2005 and the record as to the conspiracy, the district court found that White was responsible for the 124 fraudulent tax returns filed after that date, whether the returns bore an Atlanta or Americus address, for an intended loss amount of $1,004,084. This loss amount resulted in a 16-level increase in Defendant White’s offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(I).