United States v. Robert Brandt

MEMORANDUM

Robert Brandt appeals his conviction for wire fraud based on a fraudulent scheme to obtain mortgage loans for the purchase of residential properties at inflated prices. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. The false statements to lenders were material. When the facts are "viewed in the light most favorable to the government, the straw buyers misstated their income, assets, employment and intent to occupy the properties. As president of Escrow Authority, Brandt also signed and submitted fraudulent HUD-1 forms that misstated the fees being collected for Escrow Authority’s services. Such statements, which bear directly on a buyer’s ability to repay the loan and on the escrow agency’s interest in securing the loan, are material. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 509 , 115 S.Ct. 2310 , 132 L.Ed.2d 444 (1995) (holding that a false statement is material if it has “a natural tendency to influence, or [be] capable of influencing, the decision of the decision-making body to which it was addressed”) (internal quotation marks omitted) (alteration in original); see also United States v. Nash, 115 F.3d 1431, 1437 (9th Cir.1997). Lender…