United States v. Sherry Washington
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9651
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Washington was convicted of conspiracy to commit program fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering arising from a We Care wellness program with Detroit Public Schools (DPS).
- The government relied on circumstantial evidence showing inflated invoices, lack of DPS contracts, unwritten arrangements, and cash kickbacks through a DPS insider who approved payments.
- A4L billed for future work and large sums without time-tracking or contracts; DPS policy required bidding and written contracts, which were not followed.
- Washington organized and facilitated cash payments to Hill, an inside DPS employee, and helped distribute proceeds to partners.
- The district court upheld enhancements for Washington’s role as organizer or leader and for a loss amount exceeding $2.5 million, with a downward variance for charitable work; sentence issued was 60 months, with 84 months concurrent.
- Washington challenged sufficiency of evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and the sentencing enhancements on appeal, all of which the Sixth Circuit denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the conspiracy to commit program fraud evidence | Washington argues evidence fails to prove fraudulent intent. | Government asserts circumstantial evidence supports intent and conspiracy. | Evidence sufficient to sustain conspiracy verdict. |
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel on direct appeal | Failure to present Satchel, volunteerism, and sister’s testimony prejudiced defense. | Counsel’s decisions were reasonable strategic choices; prejudice not shown. | No ineffective assistance; no prejudice established. |
| Organizational/leadership role enhancement under 3B1.1 | Washington was not a leader; enhancement improper. | District court properly found organizer/leader given control and payments scheme. | 3B1.1(a) enhancement affirmed; deferential review applied. |
| Loss amount for § 2B1.1(b)(1)(J) enhancement | Court should reduce loss by fair market value of work performed; program largely legitimate work. | Loss capped at at least $2.5 million; total program considered a sham, with no FMV reduction. | Loss calculation upheld; reasonable estimate supported by record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review uses rational juror standard)
- Buford v. United States, 532 U.S. 59 (U.S. 2001) (deferential review for certain sentencing questions; institutional advantages of district court)
- United States v. Vasquez, 560 F.3d 461 (6th Cir. 2009) (standard of review for 3B1.1 enhanced leadership/involvement)
- United States v. Davis, 490 F.3d 541 (6th Cir. 2007) (circumstantial evidence and inference in proving fraud/intent)
- United States v. Jones, 641 F.3d 706 (6th Cir. 2011) (supporting fraud convictions with suspicious billing and records gaps)
- United States v. Poulsen, 655 F.3d 492 (6th Cir. 2011) (methodology for loss calculation under § 2B1.1)
- United States v. Dupree, 323 F.3d 480 (6th Cir. 2003) (burden to prove loss amount by preponderance)
- United States v. Williams, 176 F.3d 301 (6th Cir. 1999) (direct appeal review of ineffective assistance when new counsel present)
- United States v. Crowe, 291 F.3d 884 (6th Cir. 2002) (ineffective assistance on direct appeal limited by record)