Criminal Law

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 30-month term of incarceration in conspiracy to commit robbery charge, under circumstances where defendant and others agreed to rob truck containing large amount of cash destined to purchase marijuana in California, but where defendant’s group failed to apprehend truck, after losing sight of truck in traffic while truck was on way to California. Although defendant argued that Dist. Ct. erred in refusing to reduce his base offense level under section 2X1.1(b)(2) of USSG because robbery did not come to fruition, Dist. Ct. properly denied defendant’s request for reduction in offense level, where defendant had completed all of preparations for commission of robbery, and where it could be assumed that robbery would have occurred, but for unforeseen event such as truck becoming lost in traffic. Result would be different if preparations for committing robbery had been interrupted.

In prosecution on wire fraud charge stemming from scheme in which defendant and others submitted false loan application documents to bank in order to obtain inflated loan on sale of real estate, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s request to impeach govt. witness with 2000 conviction on charge of theft concerning program receiving federal funds, where record showed that said witness had already admitted to pleading guilty to two counts of wire fraud in instant indictment, as well as to nine counts of wire fraud in separate federal case that occurred within ten years of instant offense. Witness’ 2000 conviction was “stale” and had only minimal probative value, when compared to witness’ more recent convictions that were disclosed to jury. Moreover, testimony of said witness did not play crucial role in defendant’s conviction, where other evidence corroborated witness’ version of events that portrayed defendant as playing active role in instant mortgage fraud scheme.