Legal Opinion

United States v. Magnuson

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided September 20, 2002No. 02-40236PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Per curiam

Rudolph Carl Magnuson pled guilty to one count of wire fraud, pursuant to a written agreement. Magnuson argues that the district court erroneously imposed a two-level sentencing enhancement for using “mass-marketing” in the commission of his offense and clearly erred in assessing a $20,000 fine. We affirm.

Magnuson operated an advance fee scheme, placing ads in grocery store tabloid newspapers promising interest-free loans. After collecting “application fees” and “deposits” from unwitting victims, Magnuson kept the money for his own use and did not extend a loan to any applicants.

He objects to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mink v. AAAA Development LLCCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
  2. United States v. Marion Eugene FairCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
  3. United States v. Michael D. PirelloCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
  4. United States v. Todd Deming, Drew Deming, Bruce Deming, and Ann DemingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. United States v. Enitan IsiweleCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
  2. United States v. MauskarCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009
  3. United States v. HeckelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
  4. United States v. Anthony ValdezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2013
  5. United States v. SloanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API