United States v. Miell
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 23648
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Miell is a landlord with hundreds of rental properties who pleaded guilty to two mail fraud schemes targeting an insurance company and tenants' damage deposits.
- District court applied three sentencing enhancements: abuse of position of private trust, 250 or more victims, and losses exceeding $1 million.
- For the damage deposit scheme, offense level was 35, Criminal History I, yielding a Guideline range of 168–210 months.
- The district court upwardly varied to 240 months, the statutory maximum, based on 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.
- Miell challenged the enhancements on appeal, arguing the district court erred in applying them.
- Evidence showed Miell controlled deposits, inflated repair costs, and retained deposits contrary to Iowa law and tenants’ expectations, affecting a large number of tenants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Miell held a position of private trust. | Miell argues landlord-tenant relationship does not fit trust. | Miell occupied a management position with discretion over deposits and repairs. | Yes; the district court did not err in finding a position of private trust. |
| Whether the scheme affected 250 or more victims. | 272 identified victims supported by PSR; 140 admitted, but overall over 250 victims evident. | Only 140 confirmed victims; challenge to count. | Yes; the government proved by a preponderance that 250+ victims were defrauded. |
| Whether loss exceeds $1 million for the sixteen-level enhancement. | Intended loss calculated from units and average deposits; evidence supports >$1 million. | Loss should be precisely calculated; deficiencies acknowledged but reasonable estimate allowed. | Yes; district court's intended loss calculation was reasonable and not clearly erroneous. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Fazio, 487 F.3d 646 (8th Cir. 2007) (abuse of position of trust standard and fact-intensive inquiry)
- United States v. Icaza, 492 F.3d 967 (8th Cir. 2007) (number of victims guidance and proof burden)
- United States v. McKanry, 628 F.3d 1010 (8th Cir. 2011) (loss amount determinations and deference to district court)
- United States v. Olson, 22 F.3d 783 (8th Cir. 1994) (private trust position requirement)
- United States v. Santoro, 302 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2002) (trust position does not require victim's subjective belief)
- United States v. Bailey, 227 F.3d 792 (7th Cir. 2000) (no requirement of victim's subjective trust)