United States v. Rodd, No. 14-3256 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseRodd, an investment advisor who produced and was regularly featured on a Minnesota local radio show, “Safe Money Radio,” was convicted of wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1343 and mail fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1341, for swindling 23 investors out of $1.8 million. Rodd used the radio show to market low-risk investment products to gain customers’ trust and maintain a client base for soliciting participants in a fraudulent investment scheme. Rodd solicited money by promising liquidity, safety, and a 60% six-month return. Rodd instead used the money for personal and business expenses, hiding behind false assurances of security and payouts to his early investors. Finding an advisory guidelines range of 70 to 87 months, the district court sentenced Rodd to 87 months in prison, applying a two-level enhancement for abusing a position of trust, U.S.S.G. 3B1.3, The Eighth Circuit affirmed, upholding the finding that Rodd occupied a position of trust. As a self-employed investment advisor, Rodd was subject to no oversight except by his investors. The discretion and control he possessed over client funds adequately supported the finding. The court did not err in failing to apply a two-level acceptance-of-responsibility reduction. Rodd took his case to trial and denied his guilt to the end.
Court Description: Riley, Author, with Bright and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 3B1.3 for abuse of a position of trust based on its reasoning that defendant's position as a self-employed investment advisor and host of a radio show called "Safe Money Radio" put him into a position of trust with his victims; no error in denying defendant a two-level acceptance-of-responsibility reduction where defendant stood trial and denied his guilt to the end, claiming he never lied or misrepresented the facts of the investments. [ June 25, 2015
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.