U.S. v. Stochel

Record contained sufficient evidence to support wire fraud charge stemming from defendant’s theft of funds from entity over which defendant had been appointed receiver. While defendant argued that motion that defendant had sent to court, which contained false statement that receivership had enough funds to pay others could not form part of wire fraud charge since defendant had withdrawn all funds prior to sending said motion, defendant’s motion was designed to lull victims into false sense of security, and thus furthered said fraud. As such, said motion could properly be viewed as part of wire fraud charge that could be used to satisfy limitations period for bringing said charge. Moreover, defendant’s assertion of instant reasonable doubt argument supported Dist. Ct.’s denial of defendant’s request for 2-level downward departure of offense level for acceptance of responsibility. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in calculating loss at $331,840 that defendant had withdrawn from receivership funds without giving credit for $216,000 that defendant had paid for receivership expenses from other funds, since defendant’s payment of said funds were made to hide original withdrawals.