Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Lange, No. 08-3957

By FindLaw Staff on January 27, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Defendant's embezzlement sentence is affirmed where: 1) as defendant at sentencing did not tie any transfers of funds listed on a government exhibit to specific cars he sold, and presented no evidence as to the amount of sales commissions paid to other salesmen on cars they sold, the district court properly rejected defendant's theory that his restitution award should be reduced by sales commissions he earned; 2) as defendant made no disclosure that he was paying himself commissions on car sales, and failed to prove these payments were legitimate sales commissions, as opposed to embezzled profits, the transfers of funds from the credit union accounts at issue were part of the credit union's losses; and 3) defendant failed to refute proof that all funds he withdrew without credit union approval were part of the total victim loss caused by his embezzlement scheme.

Read US v. Lange, No. 08-3957

Appellate Information

Submitted: October 23, 2009

Filed: January 27, 2010


Opinion by Judge Loken

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard