United States v. Timothy Shirley
720 F.3d 659
8th Cir.2013Background
- Timothy Shirley received Social Security Disability Insurance (monthly $1,229) after 2003 back surgery and was required to report any earnings that would constitute substantial gainful activity.
- Timothy worked for Mare Transportation (later Frits Transportation), a company run by his brothers Matthew and Robert, performing office/dispatch duties and occasionally driving; some employees observed him there up to seven days a week.
- Timothy was paid largely in cash by Matthew, and the company issued checks directly to pay Timothy’s personal bills (credit cards, utilities, phone, tuition); Timothy did not report these earnings to the SSA.
- SSA received a tip in January 2009 that Timothy was earning about $1,000 per week; the Inspector General investigated and a grand jury indicted Matthew and Timothy in 2011 for conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 371), theft of government property (18 U.S.C. § 641), and Timothy for Social Security fraud (42 U.S.C. § 408).
- A jury convicted both defendants on all counts; district court sentenced Matthew to 12 months + 1 day and Timothy to 21 months. On appeal, both challenged sufficiency of the evidence; Timothy also challenged the reasonableness of his sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy (Matthew) | Gov’t: evidence shows Matthew knowingly concealed Timothy’s earnings to keep benefits | Matthew: payments were familial assistance for disability, not compensation or concealment | Affirmed — reasonable jury could infer Matthew knowingly joined conspiracy to defraud and intended to steal government funds |
| Sufficiency of evidence for theft of government property (Matthew) | Gov’t: Social Security payments are U.S. property; Matthew converted funds by concealing employment income | Matthew: benefits come from a trust fund belonging to contributors, not the U.S., so not a “thing of value of the United States” | Affirmed — Social Security payments are sufficiently tied to U.S. Treasury; §641 conviction upheld |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Timothy’s convictions | Gov’t: testimony and documents show Timothy worked and was paid but did not report income | Timothy: witnesses were unindicted/convicted coconspirators and not credible; evidence inconclusive | Affirmed — appellate court defers to jury credibility findings; evidence supports employment and unreported income |
| Reasonableness of Timothy’s sentence | Timothy: below-guidelines sentence warranted under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) | Gov’t: within-guidelines sentence promotes deterrence; district court considered §3553(a) | Affirmed — within advisory guidelines (21–27 months), district court did not abuse discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Moya, 690 F.3d 944 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- United States v. Brooks, 715 F.3d 1069 (8th Cir. 2013) (evidence-viewing standards on appeal)
- United States v. Campbell, 848 F.2d 846 (8th Cir. 1988) (elements of § 371 conspiracy)
- United States v. Sweeney, 611 F.3d 459 (8th Cir. 2010) (conspiracy proof can be direct or circumstantial)
- United States v. McCorkle, 688 F.3d 518 (8th Cir. 2012) (upholding § 641 convictions involving Social Security funds)
- Overton v. United States, 619 F.2d 1299 (8th Cir. 1980) (trust-fund payments are not wholly independent of Treasury; relevant to § 641 property analysis)
- United States v. O’Kelley, 701 F.2d 758 (8th Cir. 1983) (Treasury checks are United States property)
- United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455 (8th Cir. 2009) (presumption of reasonableness for within-guidelines sentences)