U.S. v. Oliver

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 51-month term of incarceration on wire fraud charge that concerned fraudulent investment scheme in which defendant spent $983,654 in invested funds on personal expenses. While defendant argued that Dist. Ct. failed to consider purported unwarranted sentencing disparity between his sentence and 12-year sentence given to another individual who had been convicted of wire fraud involving scheme that concerned loss to investors that was 37 times loss incurred in instant case, instant sentence, which was within applicable guideline range, satisfied section 3553(a)(6) that required Dist. Ct. to consider any sentencing disparity. Ct. further rejected defendant’s claim that his sentence was based on inaccurate information, and Dist. Ct. was not required to recite guideline range for length of supervised release, where instant three-year length of supervised release was within guideline range, and where Dist. Ct. adopted recommended range in presentence report. Moreover, Dist. Ct. could impose 2-level leadership enhancement under section 3B1.1(c) of USSG, where: (1) defendant created instant scheme and was individual to decide how funds were to be invested; and (2) defendant directed another individual to make false representations to investors.