U.S. v. Moore

Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing below-Guideline 24-month term of incarceration plus 24-month term of supervised release on wire fraud charge that stemmed from defendant’s misrepresentations to investors as to amount of money he would invest on their behalf. Record showed that defendant told investors that he had planned to raise and invest $250,000, but actually raised $680,000 and invested only $200,000, while pocketing $480,000 difference for his own personal use. As such, Dist. Ct. could properly calculate intended loss at $480,000 and actual loss at $406,000 so as to support instant sentencing range, as opposed to defendant’s claim that relevant loss was only $70,000. Also, defendant could not look to appreciation from $200,000 investment to offset $480,000 that he had embezzled. Ct. further rejected defendant’s claim that loss calculation played too great of role in calculating applicable of sentencing range. Remand, though, was required with respect to Dist. Ct.’s imposition of three terms of supervised release, since Dist. Ct. had failed to address defendant’s objections with respect to imposition of said terms.