United States Ninth Circuit

In an appeal from a jury conviction and sentence for mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. section 1341 and aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. section 1028A, motion to dismiss, motion for acquittal, proposed jury instructions relating to the aggravated identity theft count, and sentence are affirmed where: 1) forging another's signature constitutes the use of that person's name and thus qualifies as a "means of identification" under 18 U.S.C. section 1028A; 2) steps taken in furtherance of a fraudulent purpose are material; 3) the jury instructions provided the jury with adequate and accurate guidance to determine the issues of mail fraud and/or aggravated identity theft; 4) the district court properly considered the defendant's non-conviction conduct in determining her sentence; and 5) the sentence imposed was reasonable.

Appellate Information

• Argued 05/06/2008
• Decided 11/26/2008
• Published 11/26/2008

Judges

• RAWLINSON, Circuit Judge:, Before:  SUSAN P. GRABER and JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and OTIS D. WRIGHT II District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Palmer A. Hoovestal, Hoovestal Law Firm, Helena, MT, for defendant-appellant Margaret Blixt., Michael S. Lahr, Assistant United States Attorney, Helena, MT, for plaintiff-appellee United States of America.