United States First Circuit

Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for wire fraud and money laundering arising from his role in a mortgage fraud scheme. Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence as to 28 of the wire fraud counts and all of the money laundering counts, contending that the district court abused its discretion in three of its evidentiary rulings, and contending that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct in his closing statement. Defendant also challenges the procedural and substantive reasonableness of his 72-month sentence and the district court's methodology in ordering restitution. The judgment is affirmed as to the conviction and sentence, and affirmed in part and vacated in part as to the restitution order, where: 1) substantial evidence supports the convictions; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in making three adverse evidentiary rulings; 3) the prosecutor's closing statement remarks were within the latitude allowed and there was no impropriety; 4) the sentence is well below the Guidelines range; and 5) the district court miscalculated the restitution award.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/01/2015
• Published 04/01/2015

Judges

• Howard

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel