United States v. Kentz
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
251 F.3d 835 (2001)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
With a partner, Charles Kentz (defendant) created a fraudulent telemarketing business that targeted elderly victims. In this scheme, Kentz called elderly people and told them that they had won large prizes—but that they needed to send money to Kentz to pay for taxes and fees before they could receive their prizes. However, no prizes existed, and Kentz kept the money for himself. After this first joint business defrauded victims out of $500,000, Kentz started a second, similar fraudulent business on his own. A few months later, Kentz was arrested for fraud relating to both telemarketing schemes. Kentz posted bail and was released pending trial. While released, Kentz continued committing telemarketing fraud through the second business. Kentz also started a third business and committed additional telemarketing fraud through that business. At trial, Kentz was convicted of defrauding more than 300 elderly victims, which included the additional fraud he had committed while on pretrial release. During Kentz’s sentencing, the district court applied several enhancements to Kentz’s baseline sentence, including (1) a 10-level enhancement for the amount of loss Kentz caused, (2) a three-level enhancement for committing new crimes while on pretrial release, (3) a two-level enhancement for defrauding vulnerable victims, and (4) another two-level enhancement for defrauding a large number of vulnerable victims. Kentz appealed, arguing that the pretrial-release enhancement was invalid because he was not given specific notice about this potential enhancement when he was released. Kentz also argued that the district court’s application of the large-number-of-vulnerable-victims enhancement was inappropriate for several reasons, for example, because (1) 300 victims was not a large number of victims for a telemarketing scheme and (2) the enhancement overlapped with the other enhancements, e.g., the ones for large financial losses and vulnerable victims, which meant that some of the same conduct was penalized more than once.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rymer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.