United States v. Quevedo
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 18607
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Quevedo, a Peruvian citizen, entered the U.S. on a visa allowing work and study and later lived in Lincoln, Nebraska.
- An indictment charged Quevedo and Carpio with conspiracy to defraud the United States and sixteen counts of submitting false claims; Carpio pled guilty to the conspiracy count.
- At trial, ten falsified tax returns were attributed to Quevedo, with refunds directed to Quevedo or Carpio-controlled accounts; seven charged returns were filed under Quevedo's or Carpio's email addresses.
- Peruvian witnesses testified they provided W-2s and SSNs to Quevedo or Carpio and received refunds afterward; some witnesses sought refunds only after returning to Peru.
- The district court dismissed six counts, and the jury convicted Quevedo on the remaining ten false-claims counts; he was sentenced to concurrent 46-month terms and three years’ supervised release, plus restitution of $79,796.
- On appeal, Quevedo challenges sufficiency of the evidence and his sentencing decisions regarding loss and number of victims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for false-claims convictions | Quevedo contends no proof he filed returns; Amanda Martinez allegedly filed them. | Quevedo argues insufficient evidence tying him to filing the ten returns. | Sufficient evidence showed Quevedo filed the ten returns. |
| Correctness of loss calculation for guideline § 2B1.1(b)(1)(G) | Include all relevant conduct and losses to compute intended loss. | Seven uncharged returns should be excluded from loss. | Eligible as relevant conduct; district court properly applied the loss. |
| Whether the district court correctly applied the ten-or-more victims enhancement | Ten or more victims exist due to impact on noncitizen Peruvians and potential refunds. | Three rationales insufficient; challenged bases should be rejected. | District court reasonably found ten or more victims; enhancement sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. McCraney, 612 F.3d 1057 (8th Cir.2010) (sufficiency review standard for conspiracy/false-claims)
- United States v. Willett, 623 F.3d 546 (8th Cir.2010) (guideline interpretation and factual findings review)
- United States v. Hodge, 588 F.3d 970 (8th Cir.2009) (preponderance standard for loss calculations)
- United States v. McIntosh, 492 F.3d 956 (8th Cir.2007) (relevant conduct in loss calculations)
- United States v. Abiodun, 536 F.3d 162 (2d Cir.2008) (adverse effects as pecuniary harm in victims)
- United States v. Icaza, 492 F.3d 967 (8th Cir.2007) (actual loss determination context)
- United States v. Skys, 637 F.3d 146 (2d Cir.2011) (definition of 'victim' and loss in guidelines context)