U.S. v. Thompson

Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendant’s conviction under 18 USC section 1014 that prohibits individuals from making false statements for purposes of influencing in any way action of FDIC or mortgage lending businesses. Instant prosecution arose out of statements defendant made to FDIC representatives regarding the status and amounts of defendant’s loans that he owed to bank under circumstances where FDIC had become receiver of said bank. Jury could properly find that defendant grossly understated amount he actually owed to bank, where defendant claimed to only have borrowed $110,000, while record showed that he actually owed over $200,000 in bank loans at time he made said claim. Ct of Appeals rejected defendant’s contention that he made no false statement because he never stated that he owed “only” $110,000. However, record showed that defendant made misleading statements to FDIC representatives, and under Freed, 921 F.3d 716, section 1014 criminalizes misleading representations. And in this case, defendant’s statements implied that he owed no more than $110,000, which was untrue and sufficient to establish his guilt under section 1014. Dist. Ct. also had authority to impose $50,128.58 restitution order that reflected lost interest income arising out of his loans, even though defendant and FDIC had entered into settlement that reflected no interest repayment.