U.S. v. Salutric

Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error in sentencing defendant to 96-month term of incarceration on wire fraud charge stemming from scheme to divert assets from clients-investors into high risk investments, even though Dist. Ct. took into consideration two impact statements submitted by individual and organization who were not victims of charged offense. Dist. Ct. may consider defendant’s broader criminal record and history when imposing instant sentence, and defendant did not object to Dist. Ct.’s announced consideration of said impact statements, even though defendant had 10-month notice that said statements had been attached to presentence report. Moreover, Dist. Ct. did not dwell on said statements, but rather focused on details of charged offense.