U.S. v. Lloyd, 91-1688EA
| Decision Date | 09 December 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-1688EA,91-1688EA |
| Citation | 947 F.2d 339 |
| Parties | Bankr. L. Rep. P 74,297 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Phillip Lynn LLOYD, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Timothy Dudley, Little Rock, Ark., for defendant-appellant.
Kenneth Stoll, Asst. U.S. Atty., Little Rock, Ark., argued (Patrick Harris, Asst. U.S. Atty., on brief), for plaintiff-appellee.
Before FAGG, Circuit Judge, FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.
Phillip Lynn Lloyd appeals his bankruptcy fraud convictions and guidelines sentence. We affirm Lloyd's convictions, vacate his sentence, and remand to the district court for resentencing consistent with this opinion.
Lloyd contends the district court committed error by ruling in limine the prosecution could use an adverse civil fraud judgment to impeach Lloyd during cross-examination. The district court made clear, however, Lloyd's testimony would influence the court's ultimate ruling. According to Lloyd, the district court's ruling effectively prevented him from testifying. We need not review Lloyd's contention. By not testifying Lloyd failed to preserve this claim of error for appeal. See Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38, 41-43, 105 S.Ct. 460, 463-64, 83 L.Ed.2d 443 (1984); United States v. Johnson, 767 F.2d 1259, 1270 (8th Cir.1985).
Lloyd also contends the district court committed error in refusing to grant a mistrial after the prosecution asked unfounded questions during cross-examination of a defense witness. Having searched the record, we find no merit in Lloyd's contention.
Finally, Lloyd makes two attacks on the guidelines sentence the district court imposed. First, Lloyd contends the district court erroneously adjusted his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1(b)(3)(B). This section provides for a minimum two-level increase if the underlying offense involved the "violation of any judicial or administrative order, injunction, decree or process." Lloyd did not violate a specific judicial order, injunction, or decree; however, Lloyd did violate a judicial process by fraudulently concealing assets from bankruptcy court officers. Lloyd sought protection from his creditors under the shelter of bankruptcy when he filed his Chapter 11 petition. Lloyd then abused the bankruptcy process and hindered the orderly administration of the bankruptcy estate by concealing assets. Thus, the district court properly increased...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Campa, No. 01-17176.
...Circuit decision that explains that "[s]ection 3C1.1 does not apply to conduct that is part of the crime itself," United States v. Lloyd, 947 F.2d 339, 340 (8th Cir.1991), and argues that his use of the legend "Luis Medina" before the magistrate judge was part of the crime of espionage. We ......
-
U.S. v. Thayer
...the bankruptcy process and hindered the orderly administration of bankruptcy estate by concealing assets. United States v. Lloyd, 947 F.2d 339, 340 (8th Cir. 1991) (per curiam); accord United States v. Guthrie, 144 F.3d 1006, 1010-11 (6th Cir. 1998); United States v. Messner, 107 F.3d 1448,......
-
U.S. v. Webster
...69 F.3d 231, 233 (8th Cir.1995); United States v. Bellew, 35 F.3d 518, 520-21 (11th Cir.1994) (per curiam); United States v. Lloyd, 947 F.2d 339, 340 (8th Cir.1991) (per curiam). But cf. United States v. Shadduck, 112 F.3d 523 (1st Cir.1997) (noting that a bankruptcy rule or official form i......
-
US v. Sabino
...and during trial testimony, thus constituting "separate incidents occurring at separate times"); see also United States v. Lloyd, 947 F.2d 339, 340 (8th Cir. 1991) ("Section 3C1.1 does not apply to conduct that is part of the crime itself.") (citing United States v. Werlinger, 894 F.2d 1015......
-
Bankruptcy - W. Homer Drake, Jr. and James W. Dilz
...at 520. 294. Id. at 521. 295. Id. (quoting BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1096 (6th ed. 1990)). 296. Id. at 520 (quoting United States v. Lloyd, 947 F.2d 339 (8th Cir. 1991)). 297. Durham Ritz, Inc. v. Williamson (In re Williamson, 15 F.3d 1037 (11th Cir. 1994). See supra notes 2-19 and accompanyin......