United States v. Yannier Arias
713 F. App'x 998
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Yannier Arias was convicted of conspiracies to commit access device fraud and aggravated identity theft, multiple counts of access device fraud and aggravated identity theft, and possession of >15 counterfeit access devices; sentenced to 102 months.
- Offenses involved stealing personal identification information to produce counterfeit credit cards used by coconspirators; loss exceeded $150,000 and at least 10 victims were identified.
- Two distinct conspiracies: one with Jose Vera (Counts 1–9) and one with Daniel Sardinas-Lopez (Counts 10–17); evidence included surveillance video of card use, counterfeit IDs, and a high-speed chase during which fraudulent IDs/cards were discarded.
- Arias moved to sever the two conspiracies, to exclude video evidence of his speeding, for acquittal on certain counts, and sought sentencing reductions for acceptance of responsibility and for a minor role; he also contested one criminal-history point for a prior diversionary disposition.
- The district court denied severance, admitted the chase video, denied judgment of acquittal and sentencing reductions, and added one criminal-history point; Arias appealed these rulings and the reasonableness of his sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Arias' Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Joinder/severance of counts | Charges from the two conspiracies should be severed as prejudicial | Offenses were of the same/ similar character; joinder proper and any prejudice cured by instructions and sequential presentation | Denial of severance affirmed; joinder proper under Rule 8(a) and no compelling prejudice |
| Admissibility of speed/video evidence | Video showing high speeds should be excluded | Video admissible to show consciousness of guilt during flight | Video admitted; no abuse of discretion |
| Judgment of acquittal for Counts 10–17 | Insufficient evidence as to conspiracy with Sardinas-Lopez | Government presented ample evidence linking Arias to that conspiracy | Argument waived for appellate review; alternatively, merits fail — conviction affirmed |
| Sentencing adjustments (acceptance/minor role) | Arias claimed he accepted responsibility and played a minor role | Arias contested guilt at trial, minimized responsibility, and performed significant roles in both conspiracies | Denial of both reductions affirmed; no clear error |
| Criminal history point for diversionary petit-theft disposition | Point improperly scored because adjudication was withheld | Guidelines treat diversionary dispositions as one point; Rockman controls | No plain error; point properly included |
| Substantive reasonableness of 102-month sentence | Sentence excessive and disparate from coconspirator's sentence | Sentence within guideline range and justified by conduct, history, danger, and deterrence; coconspirators not similarly situated | Sentence affirmed as reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Barsoum, 763 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir.) (joinder of similar offenses)
- United States v. Bowers, 811 F.3d 412 (11th Cir.) (standard for severance/prejudice)
- United States v. Walser, 3 F.3d 380 (11th Cir.) (prejudice standard and jury instruction deference)
- United States v. Blakey, 960 F.2d 996 (11th Cir.) (flight evidence admissible to show consciousness of guilt)
- United States v. Spoerke, 568 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir.) (acceptance-of-responsibility guidance)
- United States v. De Varon, 175 F.3d 930 (11th Cir.) (role-in-offense analysis under § 3B1.2)
- United States v. Rockman, 993 F.2d 811 (11th Cir.) (diversionary disposition counts for one criminal-history point)
- United States v. Clarke, 822 F.3d 1213 (11th Cir.) (distinguishing withheld-adjudication contexts)
- United States v. Docampo, 573 F.3d 1091 (11th Cir.) (comparing sentences and similar-situation analysis)