United States v. Patricia Lebron

Case: 13-10519 Date Filed: 07/21/2014 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-10519
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:10-cr-00258-EAK-MAP-3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
PATRICIA LEBRON,
a.k.a. Patricia Kumer,
PAUL GOGOLEWSKI,
JOHN W. LEBRON,
Defendants - Appellants.
________________________
No. 13-12054
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:05-cr-00075-EAK-EAJ-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
Case: 13-10519 Date Filed: 07/21/2014 Page: 2 of 3
versus
JOHN LEBRON,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(July 21, 2014)
Before WILSON, PRYOR and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
In connection with their conspiracy to engage in loan and credit application
fraud, wire fraud, and wire fraud affecting a financial institution, John Lebron and
Paul Gogolewski appeal their sentences, and Patricia Lebron appeals her
conviction for wire fraud. On appeal, they argue:
1. That the evidence was insufficient to sustain the jury’s conviction of
Patricia Lebron for wire fraud affecting a financial institution (Count 7);
2. That the district court erred by applying the U.S.S.G. § 3A1.1(b)
vulnerable-victim enhancement to John Lebron’s offense level when
calculating his guidelines range;
3. That John Lebron’s sentence was substantively unreasonable; and
2
Case: 13-10519 Date Filed: 07/21/2014 Page: 3 of 3
4. That the district court’s forfeiture money judgment in the amount of
$353,400.00 was erroneous because it included the consideration of
acquitted conduct (Count 7).
Having thoroughly considered the briefs and the record, and after the benefit
of oral argument, we find no reversible error.
Nevertheless, we note that the forfeiture money judgment incorrectly states
that Gogolewski was convicted on Count 7. Accordingly, we remand to the district
court for the limited purpose of correcting the forfeiture money judgment to state
that Gogolewski was convicted only on Count 6 of the Superseding Indictment.
AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART TO
CORRECT APPELLANT GOGOLEWSKI’S FORFEITURE MONEY
JUDGMENT.
3