United States v. Woods ( 2021 )

Case: 20-10144 Document: 00515775380 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/11/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 11, 2021
No. 20-10144
Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Donna H. Woods,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:17-CR-665-1
Before King, Smith, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Donna H. Woods appeals her conviction and sentence for conspiracy
to commit mail and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, 1349,
and three counts of wire fraud, in violation of § 1343. The district court
sentenced Woods to a total of eighty-seven months of imprisonment and two
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-10144 Document: 00515775380 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/11/2021
No. 20-10144
years of supervised release, granted the Government’s motion for a $50,000
forfeiture money judgment against Woods, and further ordered Woods to pay
restitution in the amount of $337,951.06 and a $25,000 fine. On appeal,
Woods contends that the evidence was not sufficient to show a kickback in
support of the conspiracy offense, that the evidence was not sufficient to
show an interstate commerce nexus on the substantive wire fraud offenses,
that the evidence did not support the $50,000 forfeiture money judgment,
and that the district court erred by applying a two-level enhancement for her
role in the offense. We AFFIRM.
In reviewing a preserved challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence,
this court must determine whether “after viewing the evidence and all
reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the [Government], any
rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime
beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Vargas-Ocampo, 747 F.3d 299,
301 (5th Cir. 2014) (en banc) (emphasis in original) (citing Jackson v.
Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979)). The jury’s conclusion that Woods
benefitted from the scheme fraudulently to obtain E-Rate funds by virtue of
a kickback was a rational construction of the evidence and the reasonable
inferences drawn therefrom. Id. at 301–02. Viewing the evidence in the light
most favorable to the verdict, the jury could have reasonably found that
Woods and Donatus I. Anyanwu entered into an agreement fraudulently to
obtain federal E-Rate funds for the benefit of the both of them, that Woods
knew about the existence of the agreement, and that she willingly took steps
to further the conspiracy. See Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319; United States v.
Simpson, 741 F.3d 539, 547–48 (5th Cir. 2014). Therefore, the evidence is
sufficient on the conspiracy count. Simpson, 741 F.3d at 547-48.
Woods’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the
interstate commerce nexus similarly fails. Irrespective of which standard of
2
Case: 20-10144 Document: 00515775380 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/11/2021
No. 20-10144
review applies, 1 the evidence adduced at trial demonstrates that the emails
listed in each of the wire fraud counts crossed state lines. See United States
v. Hoffman, 901 F.3d 523, 547 (5th Cir. 2018). Consequently, there was
sufficient proof to establish an interstate commerce nexus on each of the
substantive wire fraud charges. See id.; Vargas-Ocampo, 747 F.3d at 301.
Woods’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the
$50,000 money judgment also fails. This court reviews “the district court’s
findings of fact under the clearly erroneous standard of review, and the
question of whether those facts constitute legally proper forfeiture de novo.”
United States v. Reed, 908 F.3d 102, 125 (5th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted). “A factual finding is not clearly erroneous if it
is plausible in light of the record read as a whole.” United States v. Ainabe,
938 F.3d 685, 690 (5th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 259 (2020). The evidence establishes that
Woods was part of a scheme to defraud the Government and that she
benefitted from that scheme by receiving a kickback from Anyanwu. The
district court’s finding that the kickback totaled $50,000 is plausible in the
light of the record as a whole. See id. Consequently, the district court did not
err by ordering the $50,000 forfeiture money judgment. See Reed, 908 F.3d
at 125.
Finally, we review the district court’s interpretation and application
of the sentencing guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error.
United States v. Zuniga, 720 F.3d 587, 590 (5th Cir. 2013). A defendant’s
1
The parties dispute the standard of review for this issue. Woods asserts that her
general challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence preserved her challenge to the
sufficiency of the interstate commerce nexus. The Government contends that Woods
waived a sufficiency challenge on this ground due to her specific challenge to the sufficiency
of the evidence for the existence of a scheme to defraud, but not the interstate commerce
nexus.
3
Case: 20-10144 Document: 00515775380 Page: 4 Date Filed: 03/11/2021
No. 20-10144
base offense level may be increased by two levels if the defendant was an
organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor in any criminal activity involving
less than five participants. See U.S. Sent’g Guidelines Manual
§ 3B1.1(b). The enhancement may also apply “in the case of a defendant who
did not organize, lead, manage, or supervise another participant, but who
nevertheless exercised management responsibility over the property, assets,
or activities of criminal organization.” § 3B1.1 cmt. n.2. The district court’s
factual finding is plausible in the light of the record as a whole and does not
give rise to a firm and definite conviction that a mistake has been committed.
See Zuniga, 720 F.3d at 590. Consequently, the district court did not abuse
its discretion by overruling Woods’s objection to the two-level enhancement.
See id.
AFFIRMED.
4