Opinion ID: 73632
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: issues

Text: The issues we discuss are whether the district court erred when: (1) it failed to require the government to provide reliable and specific evidence regarding the amount of fraud loss; and (2) it adopted the PSI without making any findings on the issue of the disputed fraud loss figure. 9 No such statement from the investigator or Diaz exists in the record. The sentencing transcript, however, reflects Cabrera's assertion that the investigator was present and that the government received a copy of Diaz's statement. The PSI and the government both refer to Nelson Diaz as the person who made both statements and owned the air conditioning company. Cabrera's brief refers to Jorge Diaz as making the second statement and owning the company. The record also contains a sworn statement from a Carlos Diaz, who states that he owns the company where Nelson Diaz works. 10 Cabrera's statement, however, does not contain this admission. Further, the government presented no direct evidence of this admission. 5