United States v. Avery Goins

In United States v. Goins, No. 23-30726 (5th Cir. Aug. 21, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to apply a sophisticated-means Guidelines enhancement under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(10)(C).

In the district court, Goins pled guilty to wire and bankruptcy fraud. The evidence showed that Goins, the owner of a car dealership, made over 30 unauthorized credit card transactions totaling $138,800. “To prevent the recovery of the funds through chargebacks,” Goins transferred money out of the account linked to the credit card, and he further concealed the fraud by telling employees of the credit card company that his business had made sales in exchange for each of those credit card charges. Goins also harmed his bank by depositing two counterfeit checks worth $160,000. He withdrew the money the next day, before the bank realized the checks were counterfeit.

A few months later, Goins filed for bankruptcy and alleged that his buyers had written him a worthless check. In the bankruptcy proceeding, Goins did not disclose his debts to the credit card company or the bank. He also failed to disclose the assets he had transferred to another bank. Beyond that, he made several other false statements also. Had Goins’ bankruptcy claim been successful, he “would have been relieved of $457,021.87.”

At sentencing, the district court found that Goins’ crime involved sophisticated means because of Goins’ efforts to hide assets or transactions. Under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(10)(C), that enhancement applies to “especially complex or especially intricate” crimes, such as “hiding assets or transactions, or both, through the use of fictitious entities, corporate shells, or offshore financial accounts.” § 2B1.1 cmt. n.9(B). Goins argued that the enhancement should not apply because he did not use shell companies, offshore accounts, or anything like them.

The Fifth Circuit disagreed. Here, “Goins used his car dealership to lend the appearance of legitimacy” to his dealings, and he thwarted the recovery of funds by transferring money to a second bank. Then, he failed to disclose all his assets and “misrepresented his impetus for filing bankruptcy.” As a result, it “was not clearly erroneous for the district court to conclude that Goins’ overall conduct warranted the sophisticated means enhancement.”