Filed: Nov. 30, 1995
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit No. 95-40572 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, VERSUS TONY RAY MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Texas (6:95-CR-15) December 12, 1995 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 Appellant, Tony Ray Martin, pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements in connection with renewal of a loan from the Agricultur
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit No. 95-40572 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, VERSUS TONY RAY MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Texas (6:95-CR-15) December 12, 1995 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 Appellant, Tony Ray Martin, pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements in connection with renewal of a loan from the Agricultura..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 95-40572
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
VERSUS
TONY RAY MARTIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Texas
(6:95-CR-15)
December 12, 1995
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Appellant, Tony Ray Martin, pleaded guilty to one count of
making false statements in connection with renewal of a loan from
the Agricultural Production Credit Association. Over Martin’s
objection, the district court increased his base offense level two
points for more than minimal planning. Appellant contends that the
1
Local Rule 47.5 provides: “The publication of opinions that have
no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the
basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on
the public and burdens on the legal profession.” Pursuant to that
Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be
published.
district court erred because, in so doing, it relied on other false
statements regarding the collateral for the loan which he made
during a seven month period preceding the renewal of the loan. We
disagree and affirm.
Whether a defendant has engaged in more than minimal planning
is a question of fact which we review for clear error. United
States v. McCord,
33 F.3d 1434, 1454 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied,
115 S. Ct. 2558 (1995). Appellant does not contend that the
district court’s factual findings are clearly erroneous but only
that his earlier conduct does not relate to the crime to which he
pled. The sentencing guidelines define more than minimal planning
as “more planning than is typical for commission of the offense in
a simple form.” Section 1B1.1, comment. More than minimal
planning “is deemed present in any case involving repeated acts
over a period of time, unless it is clear that each was purely
opportune.”
Id.
Martin first represented to the APCA that he owned twenty-nine
head of cattle, which he did not. He later falsely represented to
the APCA that he was leasing in connection with his operation two
tracts of land, one containing 125 acres and one containing 60
acres. As a result of these representations, he was given the
initial loan. He received three advances on that loan. Later he
represented that he owned forty-three head of cattle on each of the
two tracts. He owned none of the cattle. As a result of that
representation he obtained a third advance. He then renewed the
loan making further misrepresentations to which he pleaded guilty.
2
The misrepresentations made in securing the loan and obtaining the
advances were repeated acts over a period of time which resulted in
part in the renewal for which he plead guilty.
AFFIRMED.
3