United States v. Scott Schwanke
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 19272
| 7th Cir. | 2012Background
- Schwanke aided a drug-distribution network and later cooperated with authorities; he received death threats from a coconspirator Michener after cooperating.
- Michener and others threatened Schwanke, vandalized his home, and planned his departure to the Philippines with money and a passport arrangement.
- Schwanke fled to the Philippines in late 2007 and remained there for about four years, with limited contact with authorities.
- In 2008 Schwanke, Michener, and others were indicted; Michener pleaded guilty and Schwanke pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana.
- In sentencing, the district court upheld a two-level upward adjustment under § 3C1.1 for obstruction of justice, based on Schwanke’s four-year stay abroad despite ongoing investigation.
- On appeal Schwanke challenges the § 3C1.1 adjustment, arguing the district court failed to show willful obstruction or calculated evasion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly applied § 3C1.1 for obstruction of justice | Schwanke argues the stay was panicked fear, not willful evasion | Schwanke contends no calculated evasion, no intent to obstruct | Yes, adjustment affirmed; willful obstruction supported by findings of calculated evasion. |
| Whether the district court's factual findings were sufficient | Schwanke claims insufficient findings on voluntariness and intent | Court found ongoing investigation and four-year concealment; sufficient | Yes, findings adequate to establish willful obstruction. |
| Whether Hanhardt limits apply to Schwanke’s case | Hanhardt shows lack of specific intent due to panic | Hanhardt distinguishable; not controlling here | No reversal; district court correctly distinguished Hanhardt. |
| Whether Martinez is controlling despite different § 3C1.1 caveats | Martinez supports adjustment for willful flight | Martinez involved explicit guideline 3C1.1 note exceptions | Martinez not controlling; record supports § 3C1.1 here. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Martinez, 650 F.3d 667 (7th Cir. 2011) (upheld § 3C1.1 adjustment where defendant fled after cooperating)
- United States v. Gonzalez, 608 F.3d 1001 (7th Cir. 2010) (willful intent inferred from conduct; evasion concepts in 3C1.1)
- United States v. Arceo, 535 F.3d 679 (7th Cir. 2008) (upheld 3C1.1 adjustment for fleeing while under investigation)
- United States v. Porter, 145 F.3d 897 (7th Cir. 1998) (upheld adjustment for calculated evasion)
- United States v. Hanhardt, 361 F.3d 382 (7th Cir. 2004) (limited applicability of panic/suicide-related context)
- United States v. Curb, 626 F.3d 921 (7th Cir. 2010) (distinguishes disturbed mental state considerations)
- United States v. Billingsly, 160 F.3d 502 (8th Cir. 1998) (upheld 3C1.1 adjustment for evasion after release)