United States v. Massam, No. 12-15924 (11th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his sentence after pleading guilty to theft and embezzlement of employee benefit funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. 664, arguing that the district court should have allowed a credit against loss for satisfaction from the supersedeas bond of the amount he owed his ex-wife under the asset allocation orders issued during his divorce. The court concluded that the district court did not err in refusing to give defendant a credit against the intended loss amount, and it correctly calculated his adjusted offense level and sentencing guidelines range. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
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.