United States v. Brandon Samuels, 702 F. App'x 161

In 2012 the IRS investigated Daitech Tax Services for preparing fraudulent individual tax returns; an undercover agent and a search warrant uncovered widespread falsified returns.
Daitech owner Eric Pinckney, office manager Lemuel Brown, and part-time preparer Brandon Samuels were identified as the top preparers.
Pinckney admitted that he and employees (including Samuels) routinely manipulated returns (fabricating business expenses, mileage, per diem) to increase refunds.
Multiple Daitech customers testified that Samuels prepared false returns for them, creating fictitious businesses and improper expense deductions.
A jury convicted Samuels of conspiracy to file fraudulent tax returns under 18 U.S.C. § 371; the district court sentenced him to five years’ probation and ordered $18,070.43 in restitution (portion of $152,859.43 attributed to the conspiracy).
On appeal Samuels challenged (1) sufficiency of the evidence for the conspiracy conviction and (2) the amount of restitution assessed against him.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to support § 371 conspiracy conviction	Government: Pinckney’s admissions plus customer testimony show a common plan and Samuels’ willing participation and overt acts.	Samuels: Evidence insufficient to prove agreement with co-conspirators.	Affirmed — viewed in prosecution’s favor, circumstantial and testimonial evidence supported agreement, participation, and overt acts.
Appropriateness/amount of restitution under MVRA and 18 U.S.C. § 3664(h)	Government: District court may order restitution for losses resulting from the conspiracy; apportionment and assignment by PTIN appropriate.	Samuels: Restitution should be limited to returns where customers specifically identified him as preparer.	Affirmed — restitution for returns filed using Samuels’ name/PTIN was within district court’s discretion as acts were in furtherance of the conspiracy and reasonably foreseeable; court credited repayments and excluded returns after his departure.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence in criminal convictions)
United States v. Tucker, 376 F.3d 236 (4th Cir. 2004) (elements of conspiracy under § 371)
United States v. Barnes, 747 F.2d 246 (4th Cir. 1984) (common purpose and plan may be inferred from circumstances)
United States v. Ocasio, 750 F.3d 399 (4th Cir. 2014) (broader restitution orders for losses resulting from a criminal scheme)
United States v. Blake, 81 F.3d 498 (4th Cir. 1996) (restitution covers acts underlying the offense or acts in furtherance of the scheme)