United States v. Patton
708 F. App'x 488
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Susie Jane Patton pleaded guilty in Jan 2016 to wire fraud for embezzling from Silverado Reconditioning and was sentenced to 21 months; she remained on conditions of release for related proceedings.
- While under conditions of release (and even after pleading guilty in the Silverado case), Patton embezzled an additional $107,452.08 from D&D Design through 49 fraudulent checks; 20 of those thefts occurred after her Silverado guilty plea (19 before sentencing, 1 after), plus one more during the 30-day period before reporting to prison.
- Patton pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud relating to D&D Design (one count for conduct before her Silverado plea and one for conduct while on pretrial release), with Count 14 implicating 18 U.S.C. § 3147 (enhancement for offenses committed while released).
- The PSR applied U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 and upward adjustments (loss amount, sophisticated means, abuse of trust) and a 3-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.3 (to reflect § 3147), yielding offense level 19 and a Guidelines range of 46–57 months (Criminal History Category IV).
- The district court imposed an upward variance to 82 months (57 months on Count 7, 25 months on Count 14), explaining the Guidelines’ 3-level enhancement and loss calculation did not adequately account for the multiple offenses committed while on release and citing deterrence, protection of the public, and the egregious nature of exploiting people who trusted her.
- On appeal Patton preserved only a challenge to the substantive reasonableness of the above-Guidelines sentence; the Tenth Circuit reviews for abuse of discretion and affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Patton’s 82-month above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable | Government: Sentence is reasonable given multiple thefts while on release, recidivism, need for deterrence and public protection, and deceitful conduct toward victims | Patton: Guidelines (including 3-level § 3C1.3 enhancement and loss-based increase) already accounted for conduct while on release; variance of +25 months is excessive | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; district court did not act arbitrarily or manifestly unreasonably |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for reviewing sentencing variances and deference to district court's § 3553(a) determinations)
- United States v. DeRusse, 859 F.3d 1232 (10th Cir. 2017) (describing standard for reversing sentences as arbitrary, capricious, whimsical, or manifestly unreasonable)
- United States v. Gantt, 679 F.3d 1240 (10th Cir. 2012) (clarifying appellate review of sentencing reasonableness)
- United States v. McCary, 58 F.3d 521 (10th Cir. 1995) (approving method of allocating portion of sentence to enhancement tied to offenses committed while on release)
- United States v. Craig, 808 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2015) (explaining preserved-issue scope for appeals of sentencing reasonableness)
- United States v. Conlan, 500 F.3d 1167 (10th Cir. 2007) (same; defining substantive-reasonableness appliance on appeal)