Relocation of fraudulent scheme to new state, not relocation of defendant, determines sentence enhancement under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(9)(A)

SENTENCING United States v. Paredes, No. 05-4081, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Aug. 22, 2006)(Utah). Appeal of sentence for conspiracy, bank fraud, wire fraud, and mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, § 1344, § 1343, and § 1341. HELD: Portion of U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(9)(A) that states “[i]f the defendant relocated, or participated in relocating, a fraudulent scheme to another jurisdiction to evade law enforcement or regulatory officials” is provision that refers to relocation of scheme, not relocation of defendant himself. Thus, where defendant remained resident of New York, but participated in relocation of fraudulent scheme among multiple states, defendant’s sentence was properly enhanced under § 2B1.1(b)(9)(A). Read the opinion here.