Sentencing – Relevant conduct

Listen to this article

Sentencing
Relevant conduct

A defendant sentenced for fraud was properly sentenced based on the acts of all co-conspirators.

“In order to be held responsible for ‘foreseeable acts . . . of others in furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity,’ as set out in Section 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) of the sentencing guidelines, the district court must find that the conduct of others was in furtherance of the joint criminal activity and reasonably foreseeable to the defendant.

United States v. Salem, 597 F.3d 877, 886 (7th Cir. 2010). Here, it is clear that Alexandru agreed to be part of a group of individuals determined to defraud eBay users and send a share of the funds to cohorts in Romania.

The district court correctly reviewed the conduct of all codefendants and determined that Alexandru’s scope of activity included the actions of all co-defendants. This was based on the similarity in the method of operation followed by all parties, the knowledge of the scope of the scheme by Alexandru (Alexandru was close to Cerna and knew he was the head of a crew of individuals), the length of time Alexandru participated in the scheme (eight to nine months) and the degree of coordination between the co-defendants and Alexandru (sharing information on exchange rates and the best Western Union offices to use; phone records showing calls between co-defendants; and obtaining false documents from the same source).”

Affirmed.

10-2533 & 10-2534 U.S. v. Cerna

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Darrah, J., Cudahy, J.

Full Text