United States v. Flanders, No. 08-6056 (10th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS February 19, 2009 TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. No. 08-6056 (W.D. Oklahoma) GARY W. FLANDERS, (D.C. No. 5:03-cr-00243-F-1) Defendant - Appellant. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before HARTZ, McKAY, and O BRIEN, Circuit Judges. Gary Flanders was convicted on two counts of misapplication of bank funds, see 18 U.S.C. § 656; two counts of scheming to defraud a bank, see id. § 1344(1); making a false entry in bank records, see id. § 1005; and conspiracy to make a false statement to a bank, see id. § 371. His undisputed sentencing guideline range was 51 to 63 months imprisonment. The district court varied upward, imposing a 77 months sentence. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Mr. Flanders sole issue on appeal is that his sentence was substantively unreasonable. We have reviewed his arguments and disagree. The sentence imposed is AFFIRMED. ENTERED FOR THE COURT Harris L Hartz Circuit Judge -2- 08-6056 - United States v. Flanders O BRIEN, J. concurring. In a series of ceremonial rites the leveling forces of the guidelines, their hearthstone, were sacrificed on the altar of sentencing discretion and appellate courts rendered impotent. See Spears v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 840 (2009); Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586 (2007); Kimbrough v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 558 (2007); United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
