Opinion ID: 171792
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Original Convictions

Text: In October 2002, pursuant to a plea agreement, M orris pled guilty to bank fraud (Count One) and wire fraud (Count Two). In spite of his agreement not to, M orris appealed from the resulting sentence. W e enforced his plea agreement and dismissed his appeal. United States v. M orris, 92 Fed. Appx. 706 (10th Cir. 2004) (unpublished). He received concurrent sentences of 63 months incarceration for bank fraud followed by five years of supervised release and 60 months for wire fraud followed by three years of supervised release, the sentences to run concurrently. Restitution was set at $1,681,199.19, “an amount specifically recognized in the plea agreement as permissible.” Id. at 707. M orris’ supervised release commenced on December 22, 2006. The statutorily required terms of supervised release prohibited M orris from committing any crime and required him to submit truthful monthly reports to his supervised release officer. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d). In addition, the court imposed special conditions prohibiting M orris from engaging in certain -2- employment and financial activities without the prior approval of his probation officer. M orris was to secure advance approval for employment involving the processing of credit applications or the solicitation of investors or lenders, or employment in which he would have access to “money, bank or investment accounts, real or personal property or inventory of any person or business entity.” (R. Appx. Vol. 2.) Prior approval was also necessary for M orris to open or have signature authority over any checking, savings, or credit accounts. 1 M orris’ supervised release terms required him to submit a written monthly report within the first five days of the month following the reportable activities. Each report form contained the following acknowledgment immediately below the signature line: I swear or affirm this report is complete and correct, understanding that any false statements may lead to revocation or prosecution resulting in additional imprisonment for a term of up to 5 years, a fine of up to $250,000 or both. (R. Appx. Vol. 2 at 10, 12.) In his September 2007 report, M orris falsely 1 Morris has several previous convictions for financial crimes. See United States v. Morris, 13 F.3d 407  (10th Cir. 1993) (unpublished) (Morris pled “to the crime of fraudulently using a Social Security number, 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(B), and sentenced to confinement for thirty months, supervised release for three years, and ordered to pay restitution of $6,741 . . . . At the time of sentencing, Mr. Morris had already accumulated two prior convictions he claims are related for the purpose of sentencing. The first offense, committed in the State of Georgia, was a bank fraud in which he used a false name to open a line of credit. The second offense, use of a false Social Security number to open a bank account in Oklahoma, was committed later.”). -3- stated he owned or drove two cars when he had, in fact, purchased two new (additional) cars on credit that month. He did not report these expenditures or the new lines of credit. In his October 2007 report, M orris neglected to inform the government he had applied for and received a certificate for a limited liability company in his name and had received credit lines for his nascent business. On both months’ forms, M orris handwrote “to the best of my knowledge” after the phrase “I swear or affirm this report is complete and correct.” (Id.) Based on M orris’ actions, false statements and material omissions, the government petitioned the court for an order requiring him to show cause why his supervised release should not be revoked or modified. It alleged M orris had not only violated the special terms of his supervised release, but also the general terms through his felony submission of false statements to a government agency. See 18 U.S.C. § 1001.