United States v. Randall Schuster ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                                   _____________
    No. 95-4049SI
    _____________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,             *   Appeal from the United States
    *   District Court for the Southern
    v.                                 *   District of Iowa.
    *
    Randall Edward Schuster,                *   [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellant.            *
    _____________
    Submitted:    April 4, 1996
    Filed: April 9, 1996
    _____________
    Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.
    _____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Randall Edward Schuster made an unauthorized copy of his employer's
    customer database and attempted to sell the database to a competitor.
    Following   his   arrest,    Schuster    pleaded   guilty   to   mail   fraud.   At
    sentencing, the district court assessed a two-level enhancement because
    Schuster engaged in more than minimal planning and sentenced Schuster to
    four months imprisonment, four months home confinement, and two years
    supervised release.    Schuster appeals, and we affirm.
    The Guidelines provide for a two-level increase in fraud cases if the
    offense involved more than minimal planning.          U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1(b)(2)(A)
    (1995).   "'More than minimal planning' means more planning than is typical
    for the commission of the offense in a simple form" and is deemed present
    "in any case involving repeated acts over a period of time."               U.S.S.G.
    § 1B1.1 n.1(f) (1995).      Here, the record shows Schuster planned what he was
    going to do and
    took distinct affirmative steps over time in furtherance of the crime:
    Schuster formed the intent to steal his employer's database, accessed and
    stole the database, evaluated the database and decided it would be valuable
    to a competitor, researched the competitors, contacted at least two
    potential buyers, mailed a portion of the database to a competitor, and
    negotiated the final sale of the database.   Accordingly, we cannot say the
    district court's finding that Schuster engaged in more than minimal
    planning was clearly erroneous.   See United States v. Starr, 
    986 F.2d 281
    ,
    282 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review); United States v. Barndt, 
    913 F.2d 201
    , 204 (5th Cir. 1990) (district court did not clearly err in assessing
    more-than-minimal-planning enhancement where defendant formed intent to
    steal government property, stole property, sought buyers, transported
    property to buyer, and sold property).
    We thus affirm Schuster's sentence.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 95-4049

Filed Date: 4/9/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021