United States v. Desmond Anobah
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 22383
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Anobah pled guilty to one count of wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and was sentenced to 36 months, below the Guidelines range.
- AFFC employed Anobah as a licensed loan originator for over eight years, with duties including loan origination and documentation.
- He participated in a mortgage fraud scheme involving straw purchasers and forged documents to obtain two AFFC loans totaling $760,000, resulting in about $290,000 loss to AFFC and additional losses to other lenders totaling roughly $799,000.
- Anobah admitted only certain aspects of the offense; PSR initially denied acceptance of responsibility, later modified after defendant conceded the relevant conduct on the day of sentencing.
- The district court applied a two-level increase for abuse of a position of trust and a two-level increase for sophisticated means, calculating a total offense level of 22; the sentence was affirmed on appeal.
- The appellate court also corrected a clerical error in the judgment, clarifying the offense of conviction was wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 3B1.3 applies for abuse of trust | Anobah contends no substantial discretion or trust existed | Court’s findings supported trust-based role and reliance by AFFC | Yes, the enhancement applied |
| Whether § 2B1.1(b)(10)(C) applies for sophisticated means | No additional complexity beyond standard fraud | Co-schemers’ conduct foreseeably elevated complexity | Yes, enhancement affirmed |
| Clerical error in the judgment accurately corrected | — | — | Judgment corrected under Rule 36 to reflect wire fraud |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (procedural sentencing review and reasonableness standard)
- Aslan, 644 F.3d 526 (7th Cir. 2011) (reasonableness and standards on guideline issues)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (U.S. 2007) (presumption of reasonableness for within-range sentences)
- Veazey, 491 F.3d 700 (7th Cir. 2007) (guidelines reasonableness framework)
- Fuchs, 635 F.3d 929 (7th Cir. 2011) (distinguishes licensed/employee context for trust enhancement)
- Bradshaw, 670 F.3d 768 (7th Cir. 2012) (deference to district court on close abuse-of-trust facts)
- Are, 590 F.3d 499 (7th Cir. 2009) (plain-error review for admitted evidence use in guidelines)
- Thornton, 642 F.3d 599 (7th Cir. 2011) (considerations for plain-error correction in sentencing)
- Wayland, 549 F.3d 526 (7th Cir. 2008) (sophisticated means requires greater planning/concealment)
- Johnson, 571 F.3d 716 (7th Cir. 2009) (Rule 36 clerical error context (government briefing))