United States v. Douglas Healy (2014)

See Turner, 615 Fed.Appx. at 268-69 ; United States v. Healy, 553 Fed.Appx. 560, 565-67 (6th Cir. 2014).

To demonstrate clear error, the defendant “must show the calculation ‘was not only inexact but outside the universe of acceptable computations.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Healy, 553 F. App’x 560, 564 (6th Cir. 2014)).

“We review a district court’s calculation of the ‘amount of loss’ for clear error, but consider the methodology behind it de novo.” Meda, 812 F.3d at 519 . “[T]he district court is to determine the amount of loss [under U.S.S.G. § 2Bl.l(b)(l) ] by a preponderance of the evidence, and the district court’s findings are not to be overturned unless they are clearly erroneous.” United States v. Healy, 553 Fed.Appx. 560, 564 (6th Cir. 2014) (quoting United States v. McCarty, 628 F…

For example, in United States v. Healy, Healy promoted a product he was not authorized to sell in order to raise capital for his company. 553 Fed.Appx. 560, 562 (6th Cir.2014).

Because case law clearly establishes that under 18 U.S.C § 3664(f)(1)(A) the government has the burden of establishing actual loss, U.S. v. Hoglund, 178 F.3d 410, 414 (6th Cir.1999); U.S. v. Healy, 553 Fed.Appx. 560, 567 (6th Cir.2014), and the government presented no proof of actual loss, only the total amount of payments and a deduction that has no relation to actual loss, I conclude that the sentence exceeded statutory authorization and the waiver does not foreclose the i…

See United States v. White , 846 F.3d 170 , 179 (6th Cir. 2017) (citing United States v. Healy , 553 Fed.Appx. 560 , 564 (6th Cir. 2014) ).