Third Circuit -- USA v. Ruth Arnao

USA v. Ruth Arnao
USA v. Vincent Fumo

   Political corruption case - conviction upheld, sentencing remanded.

[Very complex opinons - this is just a quick parse that omits much. - TMB]

No error in introduction of evidence that deft violated state ethics statute, as theory of defense (on federal corruption charges) was that he had done nothing wrong.

No error in denial of retrial after juror posted to Twitter and Facebook during trial.

No abuse of discretion in finding that juror's discovery of deft's excluded priors wasn't substantially prejudicial.

Where court does not calculate guidelines ranges at time of sentence (?), challenge to departures is preserved for review - no need to prove plain error.

Error in exclusion of gov't estimate of losses, as they merely needed to be established by a preponderance, and deft didn't discredit.

Where loss calculation hinges on complex question of whether employee actually did work, and the court declines to rule given the compleity of the question, plain error.

Deduction of fair market value of building illicitly furnished and used as an office was abuse of discretion, as the property wasn't returned prior to charges being brought.

Where deft commissioned painting, no error in accepting appraised value, even though it was apparently unwanted and all prints are now in storage.

Error in refusal to apply charitable association sentencing bump.

Error in refusal to apply sophisticated means sentencing bump.

Error in court announcing departure in terms of months as opposed to in the terms of the sentencing guidelines.

Error in court not distinguishing departures from variances.

No error in order for prejudgment interest, as statute seeks to remedy victim's losses, and line of cases establishing it as a criminal penalty (and therefore barring PJ interest) is inapposite.

Codeft's sentence remanded on similar grounds.

Concur/dissent - absent objection preserving the exception, review of sentence can only be plain error.  Transcript clearly reveals the grounds for departures; re-calculating ranges after departure is an unnecessary step; whole-record review indicates that this was done anyway.  More on the Facebook/Twitter thing.