United States v. Elve

115 F. App'x 310
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided December 16, 2004·No. 04-1176·Unpublished·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

FARRIS, Circuit Judge.

We understand but reject Elve’s argument that the district court erred in enhancing his sentence by two levels for more than minimal planning. An enhancement for more than minimal planning is warranted if a defendant takes significant affirmative steps to conceal his offense. Here, Elve provided false information on his loan application and thereby concealed that he had illegally obtained the HUD-owned property. He also provided his bank with a false warranty deed, which incorrectly showed that he had purchased the property for $70,000. The district court did not commit clear error in concluding that Elve took significant steps to avoid detection of his crime.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Elve, 115 F. App'x 310 (6th Cir. 2004).

115 F. App'x 310 (United States v. Elve) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Elve v. United States
544 U.S. 947 (Supreme Court, 2005)
Billingslea v. United States
544 U.S. 946 (Supreme Court, 2005)