United States v. Savarese
686 F.3d 1
| 1st Cir. | 2012Background
- Savarese and DeSimone were arrested in August 2007 outside a Iowa racetrack with six stolen cards and forged IDs, revealing a cross-country fraud scheme involving gym lockers and hundreds of stolen identities.
- The scheme spanned more than a dozen states and culminated in about $430,000 in cash advances.
- Indictment charged 28 counts including conspiracy, aggravated identity theft, identity fraud, and wire/access-device fraud; DeSimone pled guilty and Savarese was convicted after trial; DeSimone received 81 months and Savarese 168 months.
- Evidence showed Savarese stole cards, DeSimone procured false identifications, and both participated in withdrawals at racetracks and other venues, including a $2,000 cash advance using T.M.’s card.
- The appeal challenged indictment sufficiency, identity-fraud sufficiency, evidentiary rulings, and sentencing enhancements; the First Circuit affirmed all aspects.
- The court analyzed the sufficiency of the indictment, the sufficiency of the evidence, evidentiary objections, and the district court’s application of sentencing enhancements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indictment sufficiency for means of identification | Savarese contends the indictment fails to define a means of identification beyond a name. | Savarese argues name alone is insufficient to satisfy 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(d)(7)(A). | Indictment adequate; tracks statute and provides factual detail enabling defense. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for identity fraud | Government evidence insufficient to prove Savarese stole or possessed the means of identification. | Evidence of identity fraud too speculative; acquittal on some counts shows gaps. | Evidence sufficient; rational jury could find beyond reasonable doubt that Savarese aided and abetted identity fraud. |
| Admissibility of photocopies and cash advance checks; charts | photocopies and cash-advance checks may be admitted; charts help prove conspiracy. | Hearsay/authentication issues and Rule 1006 concerns invalidating charts. | Photocopies authenticated and admitted; checks/records for business records were not clearly error; charts harmless. |
| Relocation and number-of-victims sentencing enhancements | Enhancements appropriately applied for relocation and number of victims; loss supported. | Erroneous or excessive enhancements; overstates loss and mischaracterizes relocation. | Relocation and victims enhancements upheld; loss and managerial considerations upheld with DeSimone; no reversible error. |
| Managerial role enhancement for DeSimone | DeSimone exercised supervisory control over others; merits § 3B1.1 adjustment. | No sustained supervisory role; claims overstatement of his leadership. | Managerial enhancement sustained; sufficient evidence of authority over co-conspirators. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292 (1st Cir. 2000) (indictment sufficiency when statute language plus facts apprises defendant)
- United States v. Sepulveda, 15 F.3d 1161 (1st Cir. 1993) (indictment adequacy standard)
- United States v. Troy, 618 F.3d 27 (1st Cir. 2010) (indictment language tracks statute and not vague)
- United States v. Spinney, 65 F.3d 231 (1st Cir. 1995) (circumstantial evidence sufficient for conviction)
- United States v. Guerrier, 669 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2011) (indictment sufficiency and testing of evidence)
- United States v. Innamorati, 996 F.2d 456 (1st Cir. 1993) (government need not recite all evidence in indictment)
- United States v. Piper, 298 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2002) (harmless error regarding cumulative evidence)
- United States v. Rivera-Rodríguez, 617 F.3d 581 (1st Cir. 2010) (harmless error review in conspiracy cases)