USCA11 Case: 19-15163 Date Filed: 03/22/2021 Page: 1 of 6
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 19-15163
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 9:19-cr-80054-JIC-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
OLRY MAURIVAL,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(March 22, 2021)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, NEWSOM and ANDERSON, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:
USCA11 Case: 19-15163 Date Filed: 03/22/2021 Page: 2 of 6
Olry Maurival appeals his convictions and sentence of 70 months of
imprisonment for one count of conspiring to defraud the United States, 18 U.S.C.
§ 371, eight counts of aiding and assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, 26
U.S.C. § 7206(2), and two counts of filing a false tax return
, id. § 7206(1).
Maurival challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions and
the admission of an out-of-court statement by Jaezy Diaz, a tax preparer. Maurival
also challenges the enhancement of his sentence for being an organizer or leader of
the conspiracy. We affirm.
Ample evidence supports Maurival’s convictions for conspiring to defraud
the United States and for aiding and assisting in preparing false tax returns.
Testimony from agents of the Internal Revenue Service, from clients, and from
software suppliers and copies of Maurival’s business records proved that he
profited from participating in a scheme to deny the government tax revenues and
that he assisted his coconspirators in obtaining false tax refunds for thousands of
clients. See United States v. Nerey,
877 F.3d 956, 968 (11th Cir. 2017); United
States v. Hough,
803 F.3d 1181, 1188 (11th Cir. 2015). Maurival shared the
electronic filing identification number for the Vista Parkway office of his tax
preparation company, Glory Marketing and Financial Services, Inc., with
coconspirators who used the number to file false tax returns, allowed them to put
his company name on business cards, and paid some coconspirators from his bank
2
USCA11 Case: 19-15163 Date Filed: 03/22/2021 Page: 3 of 6
account. See United States v. Baldwin,
774 F.3d 711, 721 (11th Cir. 2014); United
States v. Moran,
778 F.3d 942, 960–61 (11th Cir. 2015). Maurival prepared and
aided coconspirators in preparing tax returns that claimed the earned income credit
and itemized deductions and credits at a rate that exceeded the national average.
Federal agents discovered in the Vista Parkway office a book titled “How to
Pay Zero Taxes,” in which topics and related page numbers had been highlighted
that corresponded to the deductions and credits the conspirators falsely claimed.
They also found a notebook containing handwritten notes about a “Presentation,”
“Olry,” and using “EIC.” Agents also seized from Maurival’s storage locker
materials issued by the Service that addressed the earned income credit and tax
preparer fraud involving returns that claimed inflated expenses, false deductions,
and unallowable credits and that manipulated income amounts to fraudulently
qualify for the earned income credit.
Consistent with those materials, the tax returns prepared by the conspirators
falsely claimed deductions and credits for charitable donations, automobile
mileage, unreimbursed employee business expenses, fuel purchases, and
educational expenses and falsely reported household help income. The false entries
were material because they impeded the Service from verifying the clients’
incomes and calculating their tax liability. See United States v. Taylor,
574 F.2d
232, 235 (5th Cir. 1978). And the falsifications were intentional because, as the
3
USCA11 Case: 19-15163 Date Filed: 03/22/2021 Page: 4 of 6
representative for Maurival’s tax software company explained, a tax preparer had
to enter the deductions and credits manually. On this evidence a juror reasonably
could find that Maurival conspired to and aided his coconspirators to file false tax
returns.
Substantial evidence also proved that Maurival prepared and filed individual
federal income tax returns for taxable years 2012 and 2013 that knowingly
underreported the gross receipts from the operation of his business. See 26 U.S.C.
§ 7206(1);
Hough, 803 F.3d at 1188. A third party that collected tax preparation
fees for Glory Marketing deposited into Maurival’s bank account at Wells Fargo
fees of $475,000 in 2012 and of $461,000 in 2013. But Maurival filed no federal
corporate return for Glory Marketing for taxable year 2013, reported gross receipts
of $28,496 and a net profit of $518 for the company for taxable year 2012, and
reported no gross receipts from the company on his individual tax returns for those
two years. Maurival’s individual federal tax returns were false because they
omitted a substantial amount of gross receipts from his business, see
id., and those
omissions were material because they prevented the Service from verifying the
amount of taxes that Maurival owed as a sole proprietor, see
Taylor, 574 F.2d at
235. And Maurival knew the correct amounts for gross receipts. His bank records
established that he was the sole signatory on and that he had paid Diaz and two
other tax preparers more than $82,000 for their work on tax returns.
4
USCA11 Case: 19-15163 Date Filed: 03/22/2021 Page: 5 of 6
Maurival argues that the district court erred by admitting a hearsay statement
that identified him as Diaz’s boss under the exception for statements made by a
coconspirator, see Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E), but we need not address that
argument because we can affirm on the alternative ground stated by the district
court. Before we will reverse a “judgment that is based on multiple, independent
grounds, an appellant must convince us that every stated ground for the judgment
against him is incorrect.” Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co.,
739 F.3d 678, 680
(11th Cir. 2014). If the “appellant fails to challenge properly on appeal one of the
grounds on which the district court based its judgment, he is deemed to have
abandoned any challenge of that ground . . . .”
Id. The district court also admitted
the hearsay statement under the exception for statements of a party opponent. See
Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(D). Because Maurival does not contest that alternative
ruling, “it follows that the [admission of the hearsay statement] is due to be
affirmed.”
Sapuppo, 739 F.3d at 680.
The district court did not clearly err in finding that Maurival was an
organizer or leader of the conspiracy to defraud the United States. A defendant is
subject to a four-level increase in his base offense level if he organized or led an
offense that involved five or more participants or that was otherwise extensive.
United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.1(a) (Nov. 2018). Maurival
was the sole owner and director of Glory Marketing, he controlled and distributed
5
USCA11 Case: 19-15163 Date Filed: 03/22/2021 Page: 6 of 6
the proceeds of the conspiracy, and he provided other tax preparers guidance on
how to claim false deductions and credits and the means to file their false tax
returns. See
id. cmt. n.4. And Maurival does not dispute that the conspiracy
involved at least five participants, which includes his two codefendants who
pleaded guilty and the three tax preparers he paid from the proceeds deposited into
his bank account. The evidence supports the finding that Maurival orchestrated the
activities of the conspiracy.
We AFFIRM Maurival’s convictions and sentence.
6
