Opinion ID: 181017
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Loss to Victim Enhancement

Text: Sections 2B3.2(b)(2) and 2B3.1(b)(7) of the Sentencing Guidelines together provide for a one-level enhancement if the loss to the victim was between $10,000 and $50,000. Loss to the victim includes any demand paid plus any additional consequential loss from the offense (e.g., the cost of defensive measures taken in direct response to the offense). U.S.S.G. § 2B3.2 cmt. 5. This loss need not be calculated with absolute precision. Guang, 511 F.3d at 123 (A district court need not establish the loss with precision but rather need only make a reasonable estimate of the loss, given the available information. (internal quotation marks omitted)). Here, Patrick Leva, the Vice President and Owner of E.G. Sackett Company, which installed tile at the Niagara Falls construction site, testified that because of the attack his company suffered damages in the neighborhood of $20,000. As the person in charge of the company's finances, Leva estimated the company's loss by relying principally on his recollection. Leva testified that the project's time schedule was changed, which resulted in extra costs in wages and benefits for additional workers, overtime, travel pay, gas, and van rental. Markle argues that the company saved money because the job finished three weeks ahead of schedule. Leva, while acknowledging that the job finished early, strongly disagreed that the violent attack on his employees saved money. The district court found Leva to be a wholly credible witness and accepted his testimony. Because the Government presented sufficient evidence to support the enhancement and we are not left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed, Guang, 511 F.3d at 122, the district court did not clearly err by imposing this sentence enhancement.