Sentencing — sophisticated means enhancement

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — sophisticated means enhancement

Where the defendant used straw purchasers and created false loan documents and supporting materials to defraud his employer, a sophisticated means enhancement was proper.

“On the merits, Anobah contends that the enhancement was not warranted because there was no evidence that the offense involved any greater level of planning or concealment than a typical fraud of that kind. United States v. Wayland, 549 F.3d 526, 528 (7th Cir. 2008) (offense conduct is sophisticated if it displays a greater level of planning or concealment than a typical fraud of that kind). The district court found otherwise and we see no reason to disturb that decision. The court found that the scheme involved properties in two states, the use of straw purchasers, and the creation of both false loan applications and false documents to support the misinformation in the false loan applications. The court also noted that the scheme went undetected for a lengthy period of time. In the transaction for which Anobah pled guilty, no fewer than five other people aided the scheme including a builder, a banker, a real estate agent, a tax accountant and a straw purchaser. The court did not clearly err in finding that the scheme involved sophisticated means in light of the foreseeable actions of Anobah’s co-schemers.”

Affirmed.

12-1276 U.S. v. Anobah

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Kendall, J., Rovner, J.