United States v. Sambaly Soumano, 318 F.3d 135, 2d Cir. (2003)

318 F.
3d 135
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,

v.
Sambaly SOUMANO, Defendant-Appellant.
Docket No. 01-1596.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued: January 14, 2003.
Decided: January 22, 2003.
Darrell B. Fields, The Legal Aid Society, Federal Defender Division,

Appeals Bureau, New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.
Jennifer G. Rodgers, Assistant United States Attorney (Andrew J.
Ceresney, Assistant United States Attorney, of counsel), for James B.
Comey, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York,
New York, NY, for Appellee.
Before: WINTER, LEVAL, and CABRANES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant-Appellant Sambaly Soumano pleaded guilty on April 3, 2001 in the

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Sidney H.
Stein, Judge) to one count of bribing a public official, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
201(b)(1). On November 14, 2001, he was sentenced principally to four
months of imprisonment. A judgment of conviction was entered against him on
November 19, 2001.
The conduct supporting Soumano's conviction is as follows: On July 26, 2000,

Soumano approached a Social Security Administration ("SSA") claims
representative and offered to pay the claims representative if he would issue
social security cards for undocumented aliens. Following this conversation, the
claims representative contacted the SSA's Office of Inspector General to report
the conversation. On August 10, 2000, the claims representative contacted
Soumano by means of a monitored phone call, during which he told Soumano
that, although he was not capable of obtaining the social security cards himself,
he would introduce Soumano to someone who could.

3
Later that day, Soumano met with the claims representative, who introduced
him to an undercover agent posing as an SSA employee. In a telephone
conversation on August 13, 2000, Soumano agreed to meet with the agent the
following day and to provide him with a list of the undocumented aliens for
whom he was requesting false identification, along with their addresses and
relevant personal information. He also agreed to pay the undercover agent $250
per social security card.
On August 14, 2000, Soumano and the undercover agent met. Soumano gave
the agent information for eleven undocumented aliens and $2,500 in cash as
payment for the issuance of the eleven false documents. The next day,
Soumano and the agent met again. The agent gave Soumano fake receipts for
the eleven social security cards he had paid for the previous day. Soumano then
requested two additional social security cards and provided the agent with the
personal information and addresses of two additional undocumented aliens as
well as $500 in cash as payment for these two cards. At the end of this meeting,
Soumano was arrested.
In calculating Soumano's sentence, the District Court imposed a two-level

sentencing enhancement pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines
("U.S.S.G.") 2C1.1(b)(1) because the offense charged involved more than
one bribe.1 Soumano claims on appeal that the District Court erred by imposing
a two-level enhancement pursuant to 2C1.1(b)(1). We review the District
Court's legal conclusion that Soumano's actions constituted more than one bribe
under 2C1.1(b)(1) de novo. United States v. Arshad, 239 F.3d 276, 280 (2d
Cir.), cert. denied, 533 U.S. 910, 121 S.Ct. 2259, 150 L.Ed.2d 244 (2001).
Soumano argues that, under the test set forth in Arshad v. United States, id., his
conduct constituted only one bribe for purposes of this Guideline. In Arshad,
we listed three factors to be considered in determining whether multiple
payments constitute a single bribe: (1) whether "the payments were made to
influence a single action," id. at 280 (quotation marks omitted), (2) whether
"the pattern and amount of payments bear the hallmarks of installment
payments" because they constitute partial payments of "a fixed final sum," id.
at 281, and (3) whether "the method for making each payment remains the
same," id. at 282.
Although in the instant case the method of making payments was the same for
both the initial $2,500 payment and the subsequent $500 payment, there can be
no doubt that two separate bribes occurred. First, the two sums were not
installments toward the payment of a larger, previously-agreed upon amount.
Id. at 281. More importantly, the $2,500 payment and the $500 payment were
clearly meant to influence two separate actions. Soumano made the $2,500
payment in exchange for the initial eleven false documents. The next day, after
receiving a receipt from the agent for his initial "purchase," Soumano requested
two more social security cards and gave the agent another $500 as payment for
this separate and additional request.
8
Soumano argues that, pursuant to Arshad, these two payments constitute one
bribe because they were in exchange for the same type of benefit. But we did
not hold in Arshad that, where multiple bribes are paid seeking a single type of
benefit, all of the payments must be considered part of a single bribe. Instead,
we made clear that "multiple payments meant to influence more than one action
should not be merged together for purposes of 2C1.1 merely because they
share a single overall goal or are part of a larger conspiracy." Id. at 281.
Further, Soumano's interpretation of Arshad would lead to absurd results
because it would mean that, even if Soumano made hundreds of requests for
false documents over many years and provided independent payments for each
request, his conduct would only constitute one bribe for purposes of 2C1.1.
Ultimately, the question is whether multiple payments are a part of a single
transaction or multiple transactions. Clearly, in this case, there were multiple
transactions.
For the foregoing reasons, the District Court properly imposed a two-level
sentencing enhancement pursuant to 2C1.1(b)(1). Accordingly, the judgment
of the District Court is hereby affirmed.
Notes:
1
Although, pursuant to U.S.S.G. 2C1.1(a), the base offense level for offering,
giving, or soliciting a bribe is 10, section 2C1.1(b)(1) provides that, "[i]f the
offense involved more than one bribe ... increase by 2 levels."

United States v. Sambaly Soumano, 318 F.3d 135, 2d Cir. (2003)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

United States v. Sambaly Soumano, 318 F.3d 135, 2d Cir. (2003)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

United States v. Sambaly Soumano, 318 F.3d 135, 2d Cir. (2003)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

318 F.

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Darrell B. Fields, The Legal Aid Society, Federal Defender Division,

Defendant-Appellant Sambaly Soumano pleaded guilty on April 3, 2001 in the

The conduct supporting Soumano's conviction is as follows: On July 26, 2000,

he would introduce Soumano to someone who could.

In calculating Soumano's sentence, the District Court imposed a two-level

You might also like