Notice: Eighth Circuit Rule 28a(k) Governs Citation of Unpublished Opinions and Provides That No Party May Cite an Opinion Not Intended for Publication Unless the Cases Are Related by Identity Between the Parties or the Causes of Action.united States of America, Appellee, v. William T. Robinsin, Jr. Appellant, 34 F.3d 1070 (8th Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - 34 F.3d 1070 (8th Cir. 1994) Submitted: August 19, 1994. Filed: September 2, 1994

Before MAGILL, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


William T. Robinson made a false refund claim on his 1990 and 1991 income tax returns. He later pleaded guilty to one count of filing a false claim against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 287. The district court1  sentenced Robinson to ten months imprisonment and three years supervised release, and ordered him to pay restitution. Robinson appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court erred in enhancing his sentence for "more than minimal planning." We affirm.

The Guidelines provide for a two-level upward adjustment in a defendant's base offense level " [i]f the offense involved ... more than minimal planning." U.S.S.G. Sec. 2F1.1(b) (2) (A). The district court found that Robinson's offense exceeded the simple making of a false claim. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 1B1.1, comment. (n.1(f)) (more than minimal planning means more planning than is typical for commission of offense in simple form). The record before the district court showed that Robinson did more than merely file a tax return containing a false claim; he also was involved in preparing a false W-2 form. Based on this and other evidence in the record, we cannot say that the district court clearly erred in assessing the more-than-minimal-planning increase. See United States v. Sykes, 4 F.3d 697, 699 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (standard of review).

Accordingly, we affirm.

 1

The HONORABLE LYLE E. STROM, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska

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.