United States v. Kathleen M. Starnes ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 96-3797
    ___________
    United States of America,              *
    *
    Appellee,                *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                * District Court for the
    * Southern District of Iowa
    Kathleen Monica Starnes,               *
    *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.               *
    ___________
    Submitted: April 3, 1997
    Filed: May 1, 1997
    ___________
    Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Kathleen Starnes appeals from the final judgment entered in the
    District Court1 for the Southern District of Iowa following her guilty plea
    to conspiring to commit mail fraud, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 371
    .     The
    district court sentenced Starnes to 25 months imprisonment.        For the
    reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
    We reject Starnes's contention that the district court clearly erred
    in imposing a four-level aggravating-role enhancement for
    1
    The Honorable R.E. Longstaff, United States District Judge
    for the Southern District of Iowa.
    being an organizer of an extensive fraudulent scheme.             See   U.S.S.G. §
    3B1.1(a) (1995) (court must increase      defendant's offense level if she was
    organizer or leader of criminal activity that involved five or more
    participants or was otherwise extensive); United States v. Scott, 
    91 F.3d 1058
    , 1063 (8th Cir. 1996) (standard of review).         Starnes was president of
    a company for which investments were obtained fraudulently; she recruited
    others to seek out investors; she made misrepresentations and caused others
    to make misrepresentations knowingly and with the intent to defraud
    investors; she participated in the scheme both directly and indirectly; and
    investors lost more than $750,000.
    As to Starnes's contention that enhancements for both role in the
    offense and more than minimal planning constituted impermissible double
    counting, this argument is foreclosed by United States v. Willis, 
    997 F.2d 407
    ,   418-19   (8th   Cir.   1993),   cert.   denied,   
    510 U.S. 1050
       (1994).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96-3797

Filed Date: 5/1/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021