Randock

United States v. Randock

Good Law
330 F. App'x 628
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 22, 2009Nos. 08-30268, 08-30308California1,492 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Steven and Dixie Randock appeal their sentences imposed following their guilty pleas to conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, in -violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 , 1341, and 1343. The Randocks entered into Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreements with materially identical terms that set out specific sentences of thirty-six months of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release. The agreements acknowledged, however, that the parties disagreed on the calculation of the sentencing guidelines range and would dispute whether the sentences should consist of home detention rather than incarceration. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm Steven Randock’s sentence, but reverse and remand Dixie Randock’s case for further proceedings.

1. Both Randocks challenge the district court’s application of an eighteen-level increase in their offense levels pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1, which allows for such enhancement if defendants’ fraud caused between $2.5 and 7 million in “loss.” U.S.S.G. § 2Bl.l(b)(l)(J). The Randocks assert that the court erred in using gain as an alternate measure of loss,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.