United States v. Colon-Rodriguez
696 F.3d 102
| 1st Cir. | 2012Background
- Hurricane Georges hit Puerto Rico on Sept. 21, 1998, leading to a major disaster declaration and federal aid programs.
- FSA offered low-interest emergency loans to qualified farmers; independent contractors aided applicants, including Colón-Rodríguez, an agronomist.
- Colón submitted loan applications for at least eight farmers, earning about $45,000 in commissions.
- A 2002 audit uncovered irregularities; Colón was indicted in 2007 and convicted in 2009 on multiple counts for false statements on loan applications and one count of defrauding a financial institution.
- Colón moved for acquittal arguing insufficient evidence; district court denied; he challenged three counts on appeal, and the government cross-appealed on Count Eighteen.
- The First Circuit affirmed two counts, vacated Count Eighteen, and affirmed the sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for Counts Three and Ten | United States: evidence supports false statements knowingly made to influence loans. | Colón: evidence is insufficient to prove false statements beyond a reasonable doubt. | Counts Three and Ten affirmed; sufficient evidence. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Count Eighteen | United States argued standard elements met; jury could infer scheme and intent. | Colón argued FSA not a 'financial institution' under §1344 at the time; lacks element. | Count Eighteen reversed (insufficient evidence on financial institution element). |
| Reasonableness of the sentence within the Guidelines | Colón's sentence within a properly calculated GSR; reflects substantial loss and scheme. | Colón seeks downward variance due to mitigating factors and misalignment of loss to offense seriousness. | Sentence affirmed as reasonable within the GSR. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Rodríguez-Vélez, 597 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2010) (de novo standard for acquittal on sufficiency review)
- United States v. Alfonzo-Reyes, 592 F.3d 284 (1st Cir. 2010) (sufficiency of evidence for §1014 false statements)
- United States v. Blasini-Lluberas, 169 F.3d 57 (1st Cir. 1999) (elements of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 defraud-financial institution)
- United States v. Ortiz, 447 F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2006) (courts may infer falsity from circumstantial evidence)
- United States v. Lipscomb, 539 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2008) (credibility determinations are for the jury)
- United States v. Manor, 633 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2011) (jury credibility determinations lie with the jury)
- United States v. Madera-Ortiz, 637 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion review of sentencing, within-GSR considerations)
- United States v. Fernández-Hernández, 652 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2011) (sentencing factors and reasonableness within range)
- United States v. Carrasco-de- Jesús, 589 F.3d 22 (1st Cir. 2009) (weighing sentencing factors within discretion)
- United States v. Turbides-Leonardo, 468 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2006) (brevity vs. explanation of within-range sentences)