Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Marco Correa, 11th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    15 views4 pages
    The document is a court ruling on appeals by Marco Correa and Gerson Gomes challenging their 40 month prison sentences for conspiracy to defraud with device-making equipment and aggravated identity theft. The court affirmed the sentences, finding that the district court reasonably determined the statutory purposes of sentencing were best served by imposing sentences at the high end of the guideline range. The district court rejected the defendants' arguments in mitigation and found their crimes egregious given the intended loss of $43,040.13 and dismissal of additional identity theft counts.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-11-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-10706

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court ruling on appeals by Marco Correa and Gerson Gomes challenging their 40 month prison sentences for conspiracy to defraud with device-making equipment and aggravated identity theft. The court affirmed the sentences, finding that the district court reasonably determined the statutory purposes of sentencing were best served by imposing sentences at the high end of the guideline range. The district court rejected the defendants' arguments in mitigation and found their crimes egregious given the intended loss of $43,040.13 and dismissal of additional identity theft counts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    15 views4 pages

    United States v. Marco Correa, 11th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court ruling on appeals by Marco Correa and Gerson Gomes challenging their 40 month prison sentences for conspiracy to defraud with device-making equipment and aggravated identity theft. The court affirmed the sentences, finding that the district court reasonably determined the statutory purposes of sentencing were best served by imposing sentences at the high end of the guideline range. The district court rejected the defendants' arguments in mitigation and found their crimes egregious given the intended loss of $43,040.13 and dismissal of additional identity theft counts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    Case: 14-10706

    Date Filed: 11/21/2014

    Page: 1 of 4

    [DO NOT PUBLISH]

    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________
    No. 14-10706
    Non-Argument Calendar
    ________________________
    D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-20725-JIC-1

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    MARCO CORREA,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ________________________
    No. 14-10861
    Non-Argument Calendar
    ________________________
    D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cr-20725-JIC-2

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff-Appellee,

    Case: 14-10706

    Date Filed: 11/21/2014

    Page: 2 of 4

    versus
    GERSON GOMES,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ________________________
    Appeals from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Florida
    ________________________
    (November 21, 2014)
    Before WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:
    In their consolidated appeals, Marco Correa and Gerson Gomes challenge
    their sentences of 40 months of imprisonment, which were imposed after they
    pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud with device-making equipment, 18 U.S.C.
    1029(a)(4), and aggravated identity theft, id. 1028A(a)(1). Correa and Gomes
    argue that their sentences are unreasonable. We affirm.
    The district court did not abuse its discretion. Correa and Gomes, citizens of
    Brazil, entered the United States on the same day. Within one month, the two men
    established a residence in Miami, Florida; twice installed skimming devices and a
    camera on an automatic teller machine used by 87 debit cardholders; and used the
    account information stolen from some of those cardholders to rent videotapes and
    withdraw $500 from a customer of JP Morgan Chase Bank. The district court
    2

    Case: 14-10706

    Date Filed: 11/21/2014

    Page: 3 of 4

    reasonably determined that the statutory purposes of sentencing, see 18 U.S.C.


    3553, were best served by imposing a sentence at the high end of Correas and
    Gomess advisory guideline range of 10 to 16 months of imprisonment for their
    roles in the conspiracy that would run consecutive to a mandatory term of 24
    months of imprisonment for stealing personal identification information, see id.
    1028A(a)(1), (b)(2).
    Correa and Gomes argue that the district court failed to consider any
    mitigating factors other than their acceptance of responsibility, but the district
    court found their arguments in mitigation unpersuasive. The district court rejected
    Correas arguments that he had been gainfully employed in Brazil and had been
    influenced by Gomes and Gomess argument that he had not transferred the
    identity information to a third party.
    Correa and Gomes also argue that the district court based the sentence
    exclusively on its finding that they entered the United States intending to steal
    identity information, but the district court took into account the egregious nature
    of the crimes; Correas and Gomess admissions that the total intended loss was
    $43,040.13; and the agreement of the government to dismiss five additional counts
    of identity theft. And Correa invited any error by admitting during his sentencing
    hearing that a strong inference could be drawn that he and Gomes entered the
    country to steal other persons identities. See United States v. Brannan, 562 F.3d
    3

    Case: 14-10706

    Date Filed: 11/21/2014

    Page: 4 of 4

    1300, 1306 (11th Cir. 2009). Correas and Gomess sentences to a term within the
    advisory guideline range are reasonable.
    We AFFIRM Correas and Gomess sentences.

    You might also like