Posted On: July 22, 2009 by Russell Mace

Printing Counterfeit Bills Insufficient to Support a Leadership Enhancement

In United States v. Cameron, appellate number 08-4277, the defendant was convicted of three counts of uttering counterfeited obligations and one count of falsely making and counterfeiting obligations of the United States. The appellant, through his appellate attorney, challenged his conviction of falsely making and counterfeiting obligations in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 471. The defendant's appellate lawyer argued that the government failed to present an evidence that he actually used a computer to manufacture counterfeit bills, that there was no evidence presented at trial about the details of the counterfeiting operation, only one counterfeit image was found on his sister's computer, his sister's printer was never recovered, and that his fingerprints were found on a small portion of the evidence seized from his home.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals relied on the circumstantial evidence presented by the government linking the appellant to manufacturing the bills, the testimony of an FBI agent who matched the serial number on the counterfeit computer image to a bill found in the defendant's home and held that there was sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction.

However, the Fourth Circuit reversed the appellant's sentence, finding that the evidence was insufficient to support the four level enhancement he received for being a leader or organizer of a counterfeiting operation. Pursuant to 3B1.1(a) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, a person is subjected to this leadership enhancement if he was the leader or organizer of criminal activity that involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive. The defendant must actual have a leadership role over another participant.

The Fourth Circuit noted that there was no evidence that the appellant planned, or organized the criminal activity, and more importantly, there was no evidence that he exercised any control or authority over the other participants, recruited other accomplices, or that he claimed any or a large share of the profits of the criminal activity.

This opinion suggests that a defendant must have more of a leadership role than manufacturing counterfeit bills to qualify for the four level enhancement. This opinion also reinforces the view that a sentencing court must usually find that a defendant actually had control over another participant in the criminal activity.

Appellate attorneys who practice in the Fourth Circuit often find errors related to a defendant's sentencing because the District Court may apply enhancements that are not supported by the record. The Mace Firm handles federal criminal appeals in the Fourth Circuit, the Eleventh Circuit, as well as other Circuit Courts of Appeal throughout the United States.

Bookmark and Share