Hiring is always hard, especially in a small office.
You have work that needs to be done. You can’t do it all. Maybe you’re a professional, like a doctor, and some of the work isn’t the best use of your time.
So you hire someone to help. Really, how much do you know about a person as the result of a hiring process? Yet, despite that, you give them responsibility over a portion of your business.
Erica Hall was an office assistant at an OB/GYN office in Coral Springs, Florida. The job may not have paid well, because Ms. Hall was trying to make some extra cash on the side by selling patient information to some folks who would use it to get fake credit cards.
Ms. Hall was told by the folks the government described as her coconspirators that for every patient’s personal information she handed over, she’d be paid $200. If the information was able to be used to create a credit card that could be used, she’d be paid $1000 for that patient information.
Even though Ms. Hall handed over information for between 65 to 141 folks, and that 16 of those people had information that could be used to make fake credit cards, she was only paid $200.
The federal sentencing guidelines are probably the most problematic in three areas – fraud, child pornography, and drugs.
Today’s case, United States v. Diallo, illustrates two of the big problems with the fraud guidelines. First, they’re really complicated – so complicated that federal prosecutors sometimes don’t really understand how they work. In this case, the prosecutor at sentencing took a position so clearly inconsistent with the guidelines that the government abandoned it for the appeal.
(An astute reader will notice that this means the district court went along with the federal prosecutor’s flawed guidelines understanding. It’s a shame, but c’est la guerre.).
Michael Roussel used to be a Captain in the New Orleans Police Department. As you might expect, he was convicted of bribery.
After his conviction at trial, he went to sentencing. The judge determined that an enhancement for receiving more than one bribe was warranted. The Fifth Circuit, in United States v. Rousel, disagreed.
Synergy
If Mitt Romney is right that 47% of Americans think of themselves as victims, then the Second Circuit’s opinion in United States v. Lacy may be deeply unpopular.
Like Mitt Romney, Kirk Lacey and Omar Henry had a vision for the future.
Unlike Mitt Romney, their vision involved short sales, straw buyers, and a little light mortgage fraud.
Pretty much every federal district judge in the country knows by now that the sentencing guidelines are not mandatory, the guidelines can’t be presumed to be accurate, and that federal district court judges have authority to impose a sentence above, below, or within the sentencing guidelines, applying the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
And so just about every federal district judge knows that if he or she says she’s going to give a guidelines sentence, he or she has to also say it’s the sentence that they’d give under § 3553(a).
It’s odd, but in federal court it’s very important that a judge knows what power he has, which is exemplified in the D.C. Circuit’s opinion in United States v. Terrell. If a district judge is going to give a guidelines sentence, he or she has to be clear about whether a lower sentence is even possible.
Michael Begin was a MySpace user. He used MySpace not so much to keep up with fan information about Twilight, but to make the acquaintance of a fourteen-year-old girl.
Though described as a twenty-year old Marine sniper on his MySpace profile, Mr. Begin was actually a 33 year old man with a history of convictions involving underage girls.
Mr. Begin and the fourteen year old talked on MySpace often. Their conversations were sexual in nature. He also used his cell phone to send her two pictures which were perhaps inspired by Congressman Weiner. The girls’ mother became concerned. Her daughter told Mr. Begin that she was underage. Mr. Begin was undeterred.
Giraldo Trujillo-Castillon came to this country from Cuba when he was seventeen.
Like they say, you can take the man out of Cuba, but you can’t take the Cuba out of the man. Or so seemed to believe a federal prosecutor and district court judge.
Mr. Trujillo-Castillon was accused of fraud in federal court.
James Wooten was on hard times.
As he later told the police, he was just sick of living in his car and running out of money.
He went into a bank. As the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Wooten, tells it:
I’d like to think that Cedrick Stubblefield has Occupy Wall Street sympathies.
Regardless, the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in United States v. Stubblefield shows why – if you’re going to commit fraud and be prosecuted in federal court – it’s better to defraud several Wal-Marts than to hit a bunch of mom and pop stores.
Don’t Keep Your Drugs Near Evidence of Your Fraud
The Federal Criminal Appeals Blog