U.S. v. Ali

In prosecution on wire fraud charges stemming from defendant's scheme to exchange food stamps for cash, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea even though defendant claimed that he was unaware of elements of wire fraud charge at time of plea. At time of plea, govt. described instant intentional plan to defraud food stamp program by electronic means, which was sufficient for defendant to enter knowing plea. Ct. also rejected defendant's contention that: (1) he was misled by govt. into thinking that he would receive lower sentence for acceptance of responsibility; and (2) Dist. Ct. improperly denied him adjustment for acceptance of responsibility after noting that defendant had blamed others for charged wire fraud scheme. Ct. erred, though, in entering $4.9 million restitution order where govt. expert placed loss at $4.29 million.