[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
_____________________________U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
MARCH 8, 2007
No. 05-12885
_____________________________ THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 04-00008-CR-5-CAP-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DAVID DEMETZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________________________
(March 8, 2007)
Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, and GIBSON,* Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
*
Honorable John R. Gibson, United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by
designation.
David Demetz (“Demetz”) appeals his conviction and sentence for
conspiracy to commit wire and mortgage fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, and
conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 371, 1343,
1956(h), and 1957. No reversible error has been shown; we affirm.
The Government indicted Demetz on 24 counts of wire and mortgage fraud
and money laundering. The indictments alleged that Demetz and others schemed
to defraud mortgage companies by arranging to purchase previously-acquired
residential properties at inflated prices, using false qualifying information or false
liens to obtain loans based on the inflated purchase price, and then funneling the
excess proceeds back to themselves. The jury returned a guilty verdict on 22
counts.
After hearing additional argument by both the Government and the defense,
the jury rendered decisions on special findings on points outlined in the indictment
involving Demetz’s role in the fraudulent scheme and the amounts involved. The
district court then conducted a separate sentencing hearing and sentenced Demetz
to a 108 months’ imprisonment, three years’ supervised release, restitution, and a
fine.
Demetz raises four errors on appeal. First, he argues that the district court
abused its discretion in denying Demetz’s oral motion for a continuance, given
2
counsel’s appointment only three months before trial and the voluminous
discovery involved in the case. Next, Demetz asserts that the district court abused
its discretion by admitting evidence of his 1986 felony drug conviction for
impeachment purposes.1 And, Demetz challenges the district court’s refusal to
allow defense counsel to reference a co-defendant’s plea agreement – which had
been introduced into evidence earlier in the proceedings – during closing
arguments on the special findings. Last, Demetz contends that his 108-month
sentence is unreasonable under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). We
conclude that these arguments have no merit. Demetz’s conviction and sentence
are therefore
AFFIRMED.
1
Demetz testified on his own behalf. On cross-examination, when asked why his mother was
listed as the owner of Demetz’s brokerage on the mortgage broker license application, Demetz
revealed that he had an earlier felony conviction that he feared would prevent the license from being
issued. The defense objected and moved for a mistrial, arguing that the conviction was inadmissible
under both Fed. R. Evid. 609 and 404(b). The court overruled the objection and allowed the
government to proceed on the ground that the prior conviction showed that Demetz had lied about
its existence on his initial mortgage broker application.
3