United States v. Belfrey, No. 18-1405 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and one count of failure to truthfully account for and pay over withheld taxes. The court held that any error in calculating loss amount was harmless whether the district court stated that whether it found loss to be $18 million or $4 million would not have an operative effect on the sentence. Accordingly, the district court did not procedurally err by applying a 20-level increase under USSG 2B1.1(b)(1)(K), which applies if the total loss amount is more than $9.5 million but not more than $25 million.
The court also held that the district court did not err by applying a four-level aggravating role enhancement under section 3B1.1(a), because defendant was an organizer or leader of an otherwise extensive criminal scheme; the district court did not engage in impermissible double counting by applying a two-level sentencing enhancement under 2B1.1(b)(9)(C) for violating an order excluding defendant from participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs; and the district court did not err by applying a two-level enhancement under section 2B1.1(b)(10)(C) for conduct constituting sophisticated means. Finally, defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable and the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing him.
Court Description: Kelly, Author, with Loken and Colloton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Any error in calculating the amount of loss caused by defendant's fraud was harmless as the district court specified that resolution of the dispute did not affect the ultimate determination of defendant's sentence; here, the court indicated that the use of either the government's loss figure or defendant's would result in a Guidelines range that was higher than the 96-month sentence it imposed, and, as a result, any error in adopting the government's figure was harmless; no error in imposing a four-level aggravating role enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 3B1.1(a) as the criminal activity was "otherwise extensive;" no error in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2B1.1(b)(9)(C) for violation of a prior, specific administrative order, namely an order excluding defendant from participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs, as imposition of the enhancement did not result in double counting; no error in imposing a sophisticated-means enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2B1.1(b)(10)(C); sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
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.