Appellate Law

CA1: even though some people like naturopaths, it is still a fraud

By S. COTUS

US v. Curran, No. 06-2647.  The defendant was not a doctor.  But he only had training in naturopathy.  He would tell people that they were very sick and take their money.  Eventually he was charged with fraud, and he appeals the District Court?s sentence on the basis that the loss was calculated incorrectly and called him a menace and a bunch of similar names.   However, not all of his clients felt cheated, and he argues that the District Court didn?t differentiate between the angry clients and the happy ones in calculating his offense level under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(1)(I)(2005).  The First holds that ? That a few clients later relayed their satisfaction with this fraudulent treatment through defense counsel is immaterial in light of the clear evidence of professional impropriety and fraud, affecting all his clients, that permeated Curran's practice.?  Applying USSG § 2B1.1, cmt. n.3(A)(I), the First finds it was all a scam, and that there was little evidence that showed that some people knew he wasn?t a real doctor, but liked going to him, anyway.    On plain error view, his objections to the restitution order are rejected. 

Full post as published by Appellate Law and Practice on May 12, 2008 (boomark / email).