Opinion ID: 675769
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Relevant Conduct--$30,000 Loan from Fuhrer

Text: 34 Sheahan makes a similar argument that the district court should not have included the $30,000 loan from Fuhrer that Sheahan failed to repay. Sheahan argues that the government failed to offer any evidence that the loan from Fuhrer was in any way related to writing the three insufficient funds checks on the Mark Twain account. Sheahan also argues that the government failed to demonstrate that obtaining the loan or using the loan money constituted criminal conduct in any way. 35 We conclude that Sheahan's conduct in obtaining the loan from Fuhrer and Sheahan's conduct in writing the three insufficient funds checks were part of a common scheme or plan because they involved common accomplices and common purposes. U.S.S.G. Sec. 1B1.3, comment. (n. 9). Vogt again was a common accomplice, because he assisted Sheahan in obtaining the loan by giving Fuhrer a guarantee from the Bank. This conduct also shared a common purpose with the offense to which he pleaded guilty because the loan from Fuhrer, like the three checks drawn on the Mark Twain Bank, was intended to shield the scheme to deprive Mercantile Bank of Vogt's honest services. 36 Likewise, we conclude that Sheahan's conduct in obtaining the loan from Fuhrer is properly considered part of Sheahan's criminal conduct and, therefore, can be counted as relevant conduct for the section 2F1.1 loss calculation. The district court could fairly infer from the government's evidence that the $30,000 loan Sheahan obtained from Fuhrer was just another part of the relevant conduct charged in counts I through IX, which, as noted above, the government established by a preponderance of the evidence to constitute criminal conduct. This loan from Fuhrer served to facilitate both of the schemes encompassed in counts I through IX (to deprive Mercantile Bank of Vogt's honest services or a scheme to deprive Mercantile Bank of property or money as charged) because the funds obtained from Fuhrer reduced the balances outstanding on the Avanti account and deflected attention from the irregularities in the account. In essence, the loan was acquired for the specific purpose of helping Sheahan and Vogt avoid detection of their criminal activity. Hence, we find that the $30,000 was properly considered as relevant conduct for the purposes of the section 2F1.1 loss calculation. 5