United States Tenth Circuit

Defendants' convictions and sentences for securities and wire fraud are affirmed in part where: 1) there was sufficient evidence of guilt on a challenged wire fraud count even though the victim did not testify; 2) defendant failed to overcome the presumption of reasonableness of his within-guidelines 330-year sentence; 3) neither defendant pointed to the admission at trial of any inadmissible hearsay; 4) an indictment need not charge aiding and abetting in addition to the substantive offense; and 5) defendant was not entitled to a Franks hearing because he did not allege that an affiant in support of a search warrant lied in the affidavit. However, one defendant's conviction is reversed in part where the government conceded that it had no evidence that defendant knew that his agent's sales pitch was fraudulent, and it failed to point to any evidence supporting the theory that defendant caused the agent to make any of her false statements.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/12/2010
• Published 02/12/2010

Judges

• HARTZ, Circuit Judge., Before HARTZ, BALDOCK, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Jonathan S. Willett, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellant Charles Lewis., Peter R. Bornstein, Law Offices of Peter R. Bornstein, Denver, CO, (Keyonyu X. O'Connell, Denver, CO, with him on the briefs), for Defendant-Appellant Norman Schmidt., Matthew T. Kirsch and James C. Murphy, Assistant United States Attorneys, (David M. Gaouette, United States Attorney, with them on the brief), Denver, CO, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.