United States v. Frances Jeudy

Case: 16-11831 Date Filed: 01/26/2017 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-11831
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 0:15-cr-60172-WPD-2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FRANCES JEUDY,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(January 26, 2017)
Before MARCUS, WILLIAM PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Frances Jeudy appeals his sentence of 92 months of imprisonment imposed
following his pleas of guilty to conspiring to defraud the United States, 18 U.S.C.
Case: 16-11831 Date Filed: 01/26/2017 Page: 2 of 3
§ 286; conspiring to possess and possessing 15 or more unauthorized access
devices, id. § 1029(a)(3), (b)(2), and possessing stolen mail, id. § 1708. Jeudy does
not challenge his sentence to a mandatory consecutive term of 24 months for
aggravated identity theft, id. § 1028A. Jeudy argues that his sentence of 92 months
is substantively unreasonable. We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion. We expect a sentence within
the advisory guideline range to be reasonable. United States v. Croteau, 819 F.3d
1293, 1309–10 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 254 (2016). Jeudy’s sentence is
at the low end of his advisory guideline range of 92 to 115 months and well below
the maximum statutory penalties for his crimes of fraud and possession of access
devices. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 286, 1029(a)(3), (c). The district court reasonably
determined that a 92-month sentence accounted for Jeudy’s “good family
support,” “[h]is age,” and his minimal “role in the offense” and balanced that
against the need for his sentence to address the seriousness of his offense, to “act[]
as a deterrent [to future similar crimes, and to] promote[] respect for the law.” See
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2). Jeudy and his coconspirators operated a
sophisticated fraud enterprise in which they stole identification information from
real persons and used that information to file false tax returns and to obtain
millions of dollars in tax refund payments. And in his written plea agreement,
2
Case: 16-11831 Date Filed: 01/26/2017 Page: 3 of 3
Jeudy stipulated that his offense involved ten or more victims and that he was
responsible for a loss of $25 to $65 million.
Jeudy argued that his criminal category of V overrepresented his criminal
history, but the district court was entitled to make a contrary finding. Jeudy had
amassed felony convictions for criminal mischief, aggravated battery with a deadly
weapon, twice eluding a police officer, and unlawful driving as a habitual traffic
offender and several misdemeanor convictions for resisting arrest without violence
and for driving with a suspended license. During the conspiracy, Jeudy served a
brief jail sentence but returned to the illegal enterprise upon his release. That
resumption of criminal activity was consistent with Jeudy’s history of having his
sentences of probation revoked for violating the law. Jeudy’s sentence is
reasonable.
We AFFIRM Jeudy’s sentence.
3