U.S. v. Locke

In prosecution on series of wire fraud charges stemming from defendant's participation in certain real estate transactions, Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error in failing to sua sponte strike testimony of seven lay witnesses who used words fraud and misrepresentation in response to prosecutor's questions regarding significance of false information provided by defendant in her loan applications. Said testimony was helpful to jury where said witnesses were employees of lenders involved in defendant's transactions, and use of disputed terms did not serve as improper comments about defendant's mens rea. However, remand was required for re-determination of defendant's sentence and restitution order, where Dist. Ct. had failed to make sufficient findings with respect to number of victims, as well as scope of defendant's scheme to defraud others.