United States v. Elve
This text of 115 F. App'x 310 (United States v. Elve) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
115 F. App'x 310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-elve-ca6-2004.