United States v. Irvin
682 F.3d 1254
| 10th Cir. | 2012Background
- Miller and Irvin were convicted on multiple counts in a mortgage-fraud scheme; Miller and Irvin appeal alleging evidentiary and legal errors and Miller also challenges his sentence.
- The appeals arose from conspiracy, bank fraud, money laundering, records destruction, witness tampering, and criminal contempt charges tied to inflated appraisals and forged documents in subprime lending.
- Exhibits 1-2 (a summary chart) and 2009 (a monitoring-appraisal) were admitted at trial, later challenged as improper hearsay.
- The Jordan Transaction and Lake Ozark Transaction were central to the fraud scheme, with inflated appraisals and price adjustments.
- The panel grants panel rehearing, reverses Miller’s Count 1 and Irvin’s Counts 1, 9, and 10, and remands for proceedings consistent with the opinion.
- The Organizer/Leader enhancement remains applied to Miller’s sentence despite reversal of the conspiracy conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of Exhibit 1-2 under Rule 1006 | Miller/Irvin: 1-2 admissible as 1006 summary of loan files | District court erred in treating 1-2 as admissible without proper business-record foundation | Reversible error as to Count 1; harmless for Counts 2,4,5,9,10 |
| Use of Exhibit 2009 (appraisal) | Exhibit 2009 admissible as business record | Admissibility as business record not established; Santos instruction issue | Harmless error as to Miller and Irvin for Counts 5,9,10 |
| Materiality standard for Count 2 bank fraud | Irvin's misrepresentations were material per Neder/Akers | No influence on loan decision; misrepresentation immaterial | Count 2 upheld; Irvin's conviction affirmed |
| Conspiracy verdict vs. related counts (Counts 3,5) and related money laundering | Verdicts rely on same core conspiracy; money laundering supports Counts 4/5 | Inconsistent verdicts undermine related convictions | Count 5 and related convictions affirmed; Count 3 acquittal does not undo Count 5; Miller's Count 1 reversed |
| Contempt Counts 9 & 10—knowledge of Miller’s release conditions | Irvin knew of Miller’s conditions, aiding and abetting | No evidentiary basis for Irvin’s knowledge; co-conspirator liability insufficient | Counts 9 and 10 for Irvin reversed for lack of sufficient knowledge |
| Closing arguments influence and harmlessness | Prosecutor overstated subprime crisis and defendant role | Any prejudice was mitigated by instructions; harmless | Not reversible; statements deemed harmless |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Thompson, 518 F.3d 832 (10th Cir. 2008) (standard for Rule 1006 review)
- United States v. Samaniego, 187 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 1999) (foundation requirement for business records)
- United States v. Ary, 518 F.3d 775 (10th Cir. 2008) (burden on proving admissibility of business records)
- United States v. Velarde, 214 F.3d 1204 (10th Cir. 2000) (harmless-error review framework)
- United States v. Collins, 575 F.3d 1069 (10th Cir. 2009) (harmless error standard for evidentiary rulings)
- Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999) (materiality requirement in bank fraud)
- Thornburgh v. United States, 645 F.3d 1197 (10th Cir. 2011) (definition of proceeds in money-laundering context)
- United States v. Caldwell, 585 F.3d 1347 (10th Cir. 2009) (relevant conduct for organizer/leader enhancement)