United States v. Andy Armas
712 F. App'x 923
11th Cir.2017Background
- Andy Armas pled guilty to conspiracy (health care, wire, mail fraud), four counts of mail fraud, and conspiracy to defraud the United States / pay health-care kickbacks; district court sentenced him to 87 months.
- At sentencing, the PSR and government urged enhancements for (a) leadership/role under U.S.S.G. §3B1.1 and (b) use of sophisticated means under §2B1.1; the PSR included a loss calculation that produced a large guidelines range.
- Government presented HHS agent testimony that Dr. Carlos Ramirez received kickbacks and Medicare beneficiaries were involved; the district court found Armas an organizer and that he relied on employees but did not make an explicit finding of another participant under Armas’s control.
- District court applied a two-level role enhancement, a two-level sophisticated-means enhancement, and a large loss-based enhancement; Armas declined to contest the PSI loss calculation at sentencing.
- On appeal the government conceded the role-enhancement application was erroneous; Armas also challenged the sophisticated-means enhancement, the loss calculation (seeking credit for legitimate prescriptions), and alleged ineffective assistance of counsel at plea/sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Armas) | Defendant's Argument (Gov't / Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Role-enhancement (§3B1.1) | Court lacked factual finding that another participant existed and was under Armas’s control; enhancement improper | Gov't conceded district court erred; evidence did not produce explicit finding required | Vacated role enhancement; remanded for re-sentencing without it |
| Sophisticated-means enhancement (§2B1.1) | Conduct was not especially complex or intricate; pharmacies not created solely to defraud | Court pointed to fraudulent Medicare billings, false invoices/statements, $4M cash withdrawals, and kickbacks/false records used to conceal scheme | Affirmed: no clear error applying two-level enhancement |
| Loss calculation / credit for legitimate prescriptions | Sentencing loss should be reduced to credit legitimate prescriptions billed to Medicare | Armas expressly declined to contest PSI loss figures at sentencing (invited error) | Denied review on appeal (invited-error doctrine); loss calculation not reviewed |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel’s performance at plea/sentencing was deficient and prejudiced outcome | Record undeveloped; such claims better raised in §2255 where facts can be developed | Declined to address on direct appeal; reserve for §2255 motion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mandhai, 375 F.3d 1243 (11th Cir.) (standard for mixed questions of law and fact in Guidelines challenges)
- United States v. Williams, 527 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir.) (role-enhancement requires finding of another participant under defendant’s control)
- United States v. Martinez, 584 F.3d 1022 (11th Cir.) (government bears burden to prove disputed PSR facts by preponderance; district court must make explicit findings)
- United States v. Moran, 778 F.3d 942 (11th Cir.) (focus on overall offense conduct when assessing sophisticated means)
- United States v. Bane, 720 F.3d 818 (11th Cir.) (upholding sophisticated-means enhancement where false records and concealment used)
- Molina-Martinez v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1338 (2016) (incorrect Guidelines calculation can affect substantial rights and warrant relief)