Opinion ID: 4519363
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Presentence Report (“PSR”)

Text: The PSR assigned Emmanuel a total offense level of 23, consisting of: (1) a base offense level of 7; (2) a 14-level increase based on his intended loss of $1,073,579 (the total amount of requested unemployment insurance claims); and (3) a two-level increase because the offense involved ten or more victims. His total offense level of 23 and criminal history category of I yielded an advisory guidelines range of 46 to 57 months’ imprisonment. Emmanuel filed no objections to the PSR. Emmanuel did file a motion for a downward variance to a sentence of time 6 Case: 19-10669 Date Filed: 03/25/2020 Page: 7 of 16 served based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Specifically, Emmanuel emphasized that, as of that point, he had been in prison three months after his bond was revoked. Emmanuel contended that this already “served” three-month period of imprisonment was all that was warranted because, among other reasons: (1) he admitted to his crimes of conviction and was acquitted of the aggravated-identitytheft counts; (2) his codefendants “recruited” him and “convinced” him to participate in the fraud conspiracy scheme by letting them use his bank accounts to receive the fraudulently obtained benefits and his share of the benefits was minimal at best; (3) he had no prior convictions; (4) he had a dysfunctional childhood; (5) despite his upbringing, he graduated high school, pursued a college degree, and honorably served in the Navy; and (6) he suffered from mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse. In addition, defendant Emmanuel stressed the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities, pursuant to § 3553(a)(6). Emmanuel compared his codefendants’ sentences on their fraud conspiracy convictions to the three months he had already been in prison. Emmanuel pointed out that St. Louis and Bernadel received probationary sentences for their fraud conspiracy convictions and Mathieu (the most culpable codefendant) received a 12-month prison sentence for his fraud conspiracy conviction. Thus, Emmanuel argued an appropriate and just sentence for him was time served. Emmanuel did not address his access-device-use or bank 7 Case: 19-10669 Date Filed: 03/25/2020 Page: 8 of 16 fraud convictions.