UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
PETER A. HAGLER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that convictions on five counts must be reversed because the mailings were not in furtherance of the scheme to defraud.
Hagler was convicted of mail fraud and sentenced. On appeal, he argued that mailings in five counts were not in furtherance of the scheme.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Scheme To Defraud cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Hagler was convicted of 13 counts of mail fraud. He was sentenced to one year in prison and a $1,000 fine on count 15, and placed on five-years probation on the other counts. On appeal, he contends and the government concedes that the convictions on five counts, including count 15, must be reversed because the mailings charged in those five counts were not in furtherance of the scheme to defraud.
We vacate the sentence and remand for dismissal of the five invalid counts and for resentencing of Hagler on the remaining counts. See United States v. Diogenes, 638 F. 2d 125, 128 (9th Cir.1981); Johnson v. United States, 619 F. 2d 366, 368-69 (5th Cir.1980); United States v. Clutterbuck, 445 F. 2d 839 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 858, 92 S.Ct. 108, 30 L.Ed.2d 100 (1971).
We do not decide the propriety of increasing Hagler’s sentence on the valid counts. See McClain v. United States, 643 F. 2d 911, 913-14 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 452 U.S. 919, 101 S.Ct. 3057, 69 L.Ed.2d 424 (1981). The district court on remand, after full briefing by the parties, should consider the double jeopardy ramifications of imposing an increased sentence. See United States v. Busic, 639 F. 2d 940 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 452 U.S. 918, 101 S.Ct. 3055, 69 L.Ed.2d 422 (1981); see also North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2072, 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969).
The sentence is vacated and the action is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this disposition.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Hagler, 709 F.2d 578 (9th Cir. 1983)
-
United States v. Minor, 846 F.2d 1184 (9th Cir. 1988)
-
United States v. Thaeeb BAY, 820 F.2d 1511 (9th Cir. 1987)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (U.S. 1969)
- United States v. Busic, 639 F.2d 940 (3d Cir. 1981)
- Local 281 v. Backo, 404 U.S. 858 (U.S. 1971)
- Laffitte v. Alabama, 452 U.S. 918 (U.S. 1981)
- Saunders v. United States, 452 U.S. 918 (U.S. 1981)
- Johnson v. United States, 619 F.2d 366 (5th Cir. 1980)
- McCLAIN v. United States, 643 F.2d 911 (2d Cir. 1981)
- McClain v. United States, 452 U.S. 919 (U.S. 1981)
- Miller v. New York, 452 U.S. 919 (U.S. 1981)
- United States v. Clutterbuck, 445 F.2d 839 (9th Cir. 1971)