United States v. Zander
794 F.3d 1220
| 10th Cir. | 2015Background
- Defendant Jeffrey Zander was convicted of two counts each of mail and wire fraud, one count of money laundering, and three counts of willful failure to file federal tax returns, with restitution to the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah.
- Zander worked for the Paiute Tribe as a planner and later trust resource/economic development director, and facilitated grants for IRMPs (Integrated Resource Management Plans) for five bands.
- He created fictitious companies, produced false invoices to siphon grant funds awarded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and deposited those checks into his personal accounts for personal use.
- The grants totaled varied amounts per band; ultimately, $165,000 of IRMP funds were expended, with only minimal IRMP work produced.
- The Tribe learned of the scheme in 2008; Zander was indicted in 2012 on the fraud and tax-related counts; a seven-day trial followed, resulting in guilty verdicts on all counts.
- At sentencing, the district court increased loss and restitution calculations based on Tribe-wide losses, including additional costs such as legal fees and unemployment benefits, leading to a 68-month sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of mail fraud evidence | Zander foreseen mail usage and causation to fraud. | Mailings were too attenuated or legally required regardless of scheme. | Affirmed; mailings were incident to an essential step of the scheme. |
| Sufficiency of wire fraud evidence | Defendant set in motion wires foreseeably tied to grant reimbursements. | Wires would have occurred without fraud; no causal link. | Affirmed; transmissions differed due to fraud and were incident to the scheme. |
| Money laundering conviction | If mail/wire affirmations stand, money laundering stands too. | Challenged only if fraud cases reversed. | Affirmed; downstream conviction upheld. |
| Sentence procedural reasonableness | Loss figure supported a higher sentencing enhancement. | Lower loss range should apply; enhancements overstated. | Remanded for resentencing with corrected loss calculation. |
| Restitution amount | Restitution should reflect Tribe's claimed losses. | Certain losses not causally tied to offense; overbroad. | Remanded for recalculation under correct proximate-cause standards. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 (Supreme Court 1989) (mailings need only be incident to the scheme and foreseeably used)
- Parr v. United States, 363 U.S. 370 (Supreme Court 1960) (routine, legally required mailings may not support mail fraud absent scheme impact)
- Lake v. United States, 472 F.3d 1247 (10th Cir. 2007) (required filings with no evidence of altered content cannot sustain fraud)
- Worley, 751 F.2d 348 (10th Cir. 1984) (causation for mail fraud rests on foreseeability of mailing)
- Mullins, 613 F.3d 1273 (10th Cir. 2010) (use of wires need only be foreseeable in ordinary course of business)
- Schwartz v. Wittig, 575 F.3d 1085 (10th Cir. 2009) (foreseeability and essential-part-of-scheme analysis for wire fraud)
- Ransom v. United States, 642 F.3d 1285 (10th Cir. 2011) (elements of wire fraud similar to mail fraud)
- Weiss v. United States, 630 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 2010) (interpretations of § 1341 inform § 1343 analysis)
- United States v. Wittig, 575 F.3d 1085 (10th Cir. 2009) (foreseeability and use of wires in ordinary transactions)
- United States v. Mullins, 613 F.3d 1273 (10th Cir. 2010) (integration of financial instruments into fraud schemes)