WPCg3 rZ.Yigg?okmN.Bs֬ Ǎ)]KK)x:}SN*ѹ5JA'Jc" `c|Cgսg ^(nղbM4lM waɸ%'r |Qui$I>;Qb߰+Dk)Nz 2"d+ EgƶXK9^)'JxcHL͏A:]pVl#| ?}HF9|K4>ĺΦ_%.fG+6msX~0W70VfzA~\m琿kh 0.U.,ZKr 0 "r  0= 0F 0P. 0Z~ 0d n< B 0 C 6  0 @wT BX u4 BU !$'*b-U@/O/ 0_/#/UN2 %3M3(3NB3^ D3 mP3\  `&Times New Roman' 07-10327   0Bob Smythe .   hCS:Default ParaDefault Paragraph FontC $CalibriCS\  `&Times New RomanS $Calibri  A I)..      %%X%X%%%   @ :% (#XXJX:  ii    %XXJ(2I$ #G!..      %%X%X%%%        ($0 ($0 0 (($0 0 0 (2$0 0 0 0 (<$0 0 0 0 0  d I)..      %%X%X%%%   @ :%B.` hp x (#XB  v    XJX:%XXJ d($     , ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      1     @ %hJXJX%.  ERreferstotheExcerptsofRecordfiledcontemporaneouslywiththisbrief.Thereare  twovolumesdesignated IERand IIER.^%XXJ(2]$  #G..      %%X%X%%%  JX%      0   d ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      2     @ %hJXJX%.  U.S.S.G.2Q2.1providesinpertinentpart:     `     h X X?+ ` hp x X?(a)BaseOffenseLevel:6 |  X XH.` hp x (#X H X XB+ ` hp x X(#B(b)SpecificOffenseCharacteristics H  X XH.` hp x (#X H  <%` ` ` hp xX(#<(1)Iftheoffense(A)wascommittedforpecuniarygainor  d otherwiseinvolvedacommercialpurpose;or(B)involveda  J patternofsimilarviolations,increaseby2levels.  0   H.` hp x (#` ` ` XxH  <%` ` ` hp xX(#<(2)Iftheoffense(A)involvedfish,wildlife,orplantsthatwerenot    quarantinedasrequiredbylaw;or(B)otherwisecreateda   significantriskofinfestationordiseasetransmissionpotentially x  harmfultohumans,fish,wildlife,orplantsincreaseby2levels. ^    H.` hp x (#` ` ` XxH  <%` ` ` hp xX(#<(3)(Ifmorethanoneapplies,usethegreater): *z    H.` hp x (#` ` ` XxH  <%` ` ` hp xX(#<(A)Ifthemarketvalueofthefish,wildlife,orplants(i)exceeded F $2,000butdidnotexceed$5,000,increaseby1level;or(ii) , exceeded$5,000,increasebythenumberoflevelsfromthetable  in2B1.1(Theft,PropertyDestruction,andFraud)corresponding  tothatamount....      H.` hp x (#` ` ` XxHx%XXJ;7Pages d  ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      3     @ %hJXJX%:hXJ.  Thegovernmentsexpertnevermadeadeterminationofeggvalue.IER29,35.x%: K ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      4     @ %hJXJX%:hXJ.  ThedefenseexperttestifiedthathehadneverraisedEagleOwls,butguessedthat  thefertilityandhatchrateswouldbesimilar.IER6465,7475.q%:  ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      5     @ %hJXJX%:hXJ.  Thebreeder,[INSERTNAME],toldAustrianauthoritiesthathewasdownsizing  hisEagleOwlbreedingoperationandhad"stoppedbreedingtheEagleOwleggsinthe  incubator.[INSERTNAME]allowedtheeggstoremaininthenestsoftheEagleOwls  underthenaturalcareoftheEagleOwls.[INSERTNAME]furtherexplainedthatby  usingthisnaturalprocess,a50%naturalselectiontakesplace."(AmendedPresentence  InvestigationReport,p.7.)U  %:  ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      6     @ %hJXJX%:hXJ.  ThefactthattheDistrictCourtfailedtofactorinthefertilityrateisevidentinthe  courtscalculation.Thecourttook12birdstimes$2,500abirdtimesthehatchrate(.6or  .7)(12x2,500x.6or.7)togetvaluesof$18.000and$21,000,respectively.IER139.j%:  ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      7     @ %hJXJX%:hXJ.  Thenumberoffertileeggsappellantactuallyhadwasthesubjectofdispute.He  gavevaryingestimatesinhisemails,butthedetaileddailyrecordshekeptindicatedthat  sixofthetwelveeggs,orfiftypercent,werefertile.IER58.j%:  ]$ @ ..      %%X%X%%%JX%      8     @ %hJXJX%:hXJ.  Formoreonexpectedvalues,seeanyintroductorytextbookonstatisticsand  probability.See,e.g.,Mendenhall,WilliamandRichardL.Scheaffer,Mathematical   StatisticswithApplicationsat85(NorthScituate,Massachusetts:DuxburyPress,1973).x%:  I)..      %%X%X%%%   @ :%B.` hp x (#XB! :  27    !XX !XJXX!X%XXJB $(Times New RomanT#|x(rG$..      %%X%X%%%Samsung ML-3050 Series usb0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular%X,75 U #G!..      %%X%X%%%  _         :%0710327      UNITEDSTATESCOURTOFAPPEALS   FORTHENINTHCIRCUIT x    [INSERTNAME],    h     ) p      x   c     `     h      p ) \     `  PlaintiffAppellee,    ) U   @ ?+p ` hp x (#X?   `     h     ) p  N   @v. `     h     ) p  G   E.` hp x (#pX(#E   `     h     ) p  @   hB+ ` hp x (#X(#B[INSERTNAME],    h     ) p  9   hE.` hp x (#X(#E   `     h     ) p  2   hB+ ` hp x (#X(#B   `     h     ) p . +{   hE.` hp x (#X(#E   `     h     ) $t    `  DefendantAppellant.  ) m _______________________________________) f   AppealfromtheJudgmentoftheUnitedStatesDistrictCourt J TheHonorableMarilynHallPatel,JudgePresiding C ____________________________________________ <     OPENINGBRIEFOFAPPELLANT !. __________________________________________ "'   ! (#X(#!  [INSERTNAME] & "# AttorneyatLaw '#$ AddressLine1 (#% AddressLine2 )$& CaliforniaStateBarNo.00000 *%' Tel:(831)0000000 +&(    B.` hp x (#(#B -(*       TABLEOFCONTENTS         X! 2(#X(#!TABLEOFAUTHORITIESt"t"H(#.||iii    XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!INTRODUCTION""J(#.  1    XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!STATEMENTOFJURISDICTION""J(#.#2     XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!ISSUESPRESENTED""J(#.~ ~ 2 x    XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!STATEMENTOFTHECASE""J(#.663 j    XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!STATEMENTOFTHEFACTS""J(#. 5 \    XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!SUMMARYOFARGUMENT""J(#.TT6 N    XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!ARGUMENT""J(#.x x 9 @   XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X$ ` 2(#X(#$I.  THEDISTRICTCOURTSHOULDHAVEUSEDTHEFAIRMARKET 2 RETAILVALUEOFTHEEGGSASTHEMARKETVALUERATHERTHAN +{ AVALUEBASEDUPONHATCHEDANDUNHATCHEDBIRDSUSINGA $t SPECULATIVEPROBABILITYANALYSISUNRELATEDTOTHEFACTS m OFTHECASE.""J(#. 9 f   XE.` hp x (#` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$A. ` TheStandardofReviewisDeNovo.""J(#.69 X   E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$B. ` TheMarketValueofSmuggledWildlifeistheFairMarketRetailPrice.P"P"I(#.!!Z10 J   E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$C. ` TheFairMarketRetailPriceWasEasilyAscertainedByReferencetothe < EstablishedMarketValueoftheEggs.P"P"I(#.hh911  5   E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$D. ` TheMarketValueEnhancementforthePriceofAdultEagleOwlsDidNot "' HaveaSufficientNexustotheOffenseofSmugglingEggs.P"P"I(#.M13 #     E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$E. ` TheDistrictCourts ExpectedValueCalculationofFairMarketRetail %!" ValueIsFlawedP"P"I(#.#14 & "#   E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$F. ` TheCourtsProbabilityAnalysisWasUnnecessaryBecausetheActual (#% OutcomeWasKnown.P"P"I(#.&19 )$&   E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E  $ ` ` 2(#X(#$G. ` ConclusionP"P"I(#.8 8 20 +&(   E.` hp x (#` ` 2(#E_  X$ ` 2(#X(#$II.  THEENHANCEMENTSIMPOSEDFORTHEMARKETVALUEOFTHE  UNHATCHEDBIRDSANDTHEBUSINESSUSEOFTHEHATCHEDBIRDS  CONSTITUTEDIMPERMISSIBLEDOUBLECOUNTING.P"P"I(#.922    XE.` hp x (#` 2(#E  X! 2(#X(#!CONCLUSIONP"P"I(#. 25     XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!CERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCEP"P"I(#.#26     XB.` hp x (#2(#B  X! 2(#X(#!TABLEOFRELATEDCASESP"P"I(#. 27 q       XB.` hp x (#2(#B  c    TABLEOFAUTHORITIESB   ԍTABLEOFAUTHORITIES  h#C      Cases    Statutes     Constitutions  j   SecondaryAuthority  N   CALJIC  2   +{   UNITEDSTATESCOURTOFAPPEALS  FORTHENINTHCIRCUIT    [INSERTNAME],   h     ) p      x  (#(#K(#      `     h     )      `  PlaintiffAppellee,    )    @ B+p ` hp x (#X(#B   `     h     ) p  x   @v. `     h     ) p  q     E.` hp x (#pX(#E   `     h     ) p  j    hB+ ` hp x (#X(#B[INSERTNAME],    h     ) p  c    hE.` hp x (#X(#E   `     h     ) p  \    hB+ ` hp x (#X(#B   `     h     ) p . U    hE.` hp x (#X(#E   `     h     ) N     `  DefendantAppellant.  ) G _______________________________________) @   __________________________________________ +{     OPENINGBRIEFOFAPPELLANT m __________________________________________ f      INTRODUCTIONB   ԍINTRODUCTION  -C   Q      ` Thisisanappealfromasentencefollowingtheentryofaguiltypleatotwo C countsofsmugglingEurasianEagleOwleggsfromAustriatotheUnitedStates,andtwo  5 countsofmakingafalsestatementtoagovernmentofficialinvolvingthefailureto "' declaretheeggsonacustomsformandafalsestatementabouttheoriginoftheeggsona $ ! permit.Ofthetwelveeggssmuggled,threehatchedproducinglivebirdswhichthe & "# appellantsubsequentlytrainedforhispestbirdabatementbusiness.Althoughonlythree (#% birdswereacquiredfromtheeggs,andtheeggshadnovalueapartfromtheirpotentialto *%' producelivebirds,thecourtsentencedappellantasthoughappellanthadacquiredsixor  sevenbirdsresultinginafourlevelincreaseinhissentenceratherthanaonelevel  increase.Thecourtalsodoublecountedthefactthatappellantintendedtousethebirdsin  hisbusinessforpurposesofcalculatingthemarketvalueenhancementandinimposing   thecommercialpurposeenhancement. x    STATEMENTOFJURISDICTIONB   ԍSTATEMENTOFJURISDICTION  z3C   j   <`   Ӏ   ` Thisisanappealfromajudgmentfollowingapleaofguiltyinacriminal \  casebeforetheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia,and N  thiscourthasjurisdictiontoheartheappealunder18U.S.C.3742(a)(2)and28U.S.C. @ 1291.ThejudgmentwasenteredonJuly3,2007.IIER1520.XJX:%hXJ1X(#$II.XJX%   1     :hXJThenoticeofappeal 2 wasfiledonJuly5,2007.IIER21. $t   ISSUESPRESENTEDB   ԍISSUESPRESENTED 27C   f     1. ` DidtheDistrictCourterrinusingbirdvalueratherthaneggvaluein X calculatingthefairmarketvalueoftheeggsappellantsmuggledintotheUnitedStates, J andifbirdvaluewasappropriate,didthecourterrincalculatingthebirdvalue? <   2. ` WastheDistrictCourtsimpositionofoffensespecificsentencing !. enhancementsformarketvalueandcommercialpurposebaseduponappellantsintended #   businessuseofthebirdsimpermissibledoublecounting? %!"   STATEMENTOFTHECASEB   ԍSTATEMENTOFTHECASE 9:C   '#$      ` OnJanuary24,2006,thegovernmentfiledafourcountindictment  chargingappellantwithtwocountsofsmugglinggoodsintotheUnitedStatesonorabout  March7,2005andApril5,2005inviolationof18U.S.C.545(Counts1&3),andtwo  countsofmakingfalsestatementsinthathechecked noonacustomsdeclarationform   ifhehadanimalsorwildlife,andlaterpresentedaformtotheU.S.FishandWildlife x  Servicefalselydeclaringthathehadbredthebirdsby A.I.inviolationof18U.S.C. j  1001(a)(3)(Counts2&4.)IIER13.OnNovember28,2006,appellantenteredaguilty \  pleatoallfourcountswithoutapleaagreement.IIER45. N     ` OnMarch22,2007,thegovernmentfilednoticeofintenttointroduce @ experttestimonyatthesentencing.IIER85.Appellantfollowedsuitwithawitnesslist 2 andbothpartiesfiledsentencingmemoranda.IIER86.OnMay25,2007,thedistrict $t courtheldanevidentiaryhearingontheissueofhowthevalueoftheeggswastobe f determinedforpurposesofsentencing.IIER87. X    ` OnJuly3,2007,thedistrictcourtsentencedappellanttoaprisontermof21 J monthsoneachcounttobeservedconcurrently.IIER16.Appellantwasalsocharged < withanassessmentof$400anda$5,000fine.IIER19.Appellantstimelynoticeof !. appealwasfiledonJuly5,2007.IIER21. #      ` OnAugust24,2007,appellantvoluntarilysurrenderedhimselftotheU.S. %!" Marshallandheiscurrentlyservinghissentenceinthefederalpenitentiary.IIER23. '#$  AppellantsestimatedreleasedateisNovember2008. )$&    ` OnOctober11,2007,appellantfiledamotionforreleasefromcustody   pendingappeal.IIER91.Thegovernmentfiledopposition,concedingthattheissue  presenteda substantialquestionoflaworfact,butarguedthatappellanthadfailedto  meethisburdenofshowingthatuponremandandresentencinghistermwouldnot   exceedthetimetakenforthiscourttoresolvetheappeal.Onthisbasis,thedistrictcourt x  deniedthemotionforreleasewithoutprejudicetorefilingifappellantcouldshowthe j  appealwouldnotberesolvedbeforeNovember2008.IIER7374. \    @   STATEMENTOFTHEFACTSB   ԍSTATEMENTOFTHEFACTS  FC         ` ThedefendantmadetwotripstoAustriawhereheobtainedEurasianEagle  Owleggsfromabreeder,[INSERTNAME].IIER67.Thebreederwasdownsizinghis  EagleOwlbusinessbecausetherewasasurplusofEagleOwlsinEurope.IIER4445.   [INSERTNAME]toldAustrianauthoritieswhointerviewedhimatthebequestofthe x  U.S.authoritiesthathewasnolongerincubatingtheeggsandthathewasgettinga 50% j  naturalselection.IIER45.[INSERTNAME]didnotgive[INSERTNAME]any \  moneyforthebirdeggsheacquired.IIER7.Helaterwroteto[INSERTNAME]and N  offeredtopayhimforthebirdsthathadhatched.Thepossibilityofanexchangewasalso @ mentionedwhere[INSERTNAME]wouldexchangeRedtailedHawkeggsforEagle 2 Owleggs,butarecentarrestofsomeonesmugglingeggsmadethatventuretoorisky.I $t ER121. f    ` OnthefirsttriptoAustria,[INSERTNAME]acquiredthreeeggs,andon X thesecondtripnine.IIER6,126.[INSERTNAME]'stripscorrespondedwiththe J ChristianandGreekOrthodoxEasterholidaysandhepaintedtheeggsandstoredthemin < anEasterbasketontheplanetodisguisethem.IER115.Heusedhandwarmersto !. incubatetheeggswhilehewasontheplane.IER59.In2001,theWildBird #   ConversationActeffectivelypreventedtheimportationofnonnativeraptorspecieslike %!" EagleOwls.IER75. '#$    ` WhenhearrivedintheUnitedStates,[INSERTNAME]placedtheeggsin )$& anincubatorathisbusiness/residence.IER58;AmendedPresentenceInv.Reportat5. +&( [INSERTNAME],aprofessionalfalconer,plannedtousethebirdsinhispestbird  abatementbusiness.Hehadreceivedaccoladesforhisbusinessfromvariousclientsfrom  schoolstorefineries.IIER2122,28.     ` Ofthetwelveeggsthat[INSERTNAME]broughtintotheUnitedStates,   threehatchedandproducedEagleOwlswhichwerelaterconfiscatedbyAgentsofthe x  UnitedStatesFish&WildlifeService.IER5;AmendedPresentenceProb.Rep.at5.It j  wassurprisingthat[INSERTNAME]wasabletogetanyofhiseggstohatch.IER58. \     ` ThepartiesstipulatedthatthevalueofanadultEagleOwlintheUnited N  Statesatthetimeofsentencingwas$2,500.IER3.AneggintheU.S.wouldbevalued @ atonetenththevalueofanadultbirdor$200to$250.IER65. 2   SUMMARYOFARGUMENTB   ԍSUMMARYOFARGUMENT  iRC   $t      ` AppellantsmuggledtwelveEurasianEagleOwleggsintotheUnitedStates. f Hisintentionwastousethebirdsofpreyinhisbirdabatementbusinesswherehewould X flybirdsofpreytoridbusinessesofpestbirds.Ofthetwelveeggs,threeproducedlive J birds.The lossoccasionedbycrimesinvolvingthesmugglingofwildlifeisthe fair < marketretailpriceofthewildlife.AdvisoryGuidelineSection2Q2.1(b)(3)(A).The !. eggshadnomarketvalueapartfromtheirpotentialincreatinglivebirds.Inotherwords, #   theeggsrepresentedonlyaprobabilityofproducingalivebird. %!"    ` Thecourtmeasuredthefairmarketretailvaluebaseduponthenumberof '#$ livebirdsonewouldexpecttoacquirefromthetwelveeggsunderidealconditions )$& multipliedbythevalueofthosebirdsintheUnitedStates.Thisformulaemployedbythe +&( courtusinghypotheticalvaluesbaseduponidealconditionshadnorelationshipto  appellantscrime.Appellantscrimewassmugglingeggs,notbirds.Thecrimeof  smugglingisnotacontinuingcrime,andthecrimewascompleteuponappellantsentry  intheUnitedStates.Themarketvalueoftheeggswasreadilyascertainableatthepoint   ofentryintotheUnitedStates. x     ` Additionally,thecourtsanalysisofmarketvalueassumedthatappellant j  shouldbechargedwiththehatchrateunderhypotheticalidealconditionsbecausehis \  conductwasresponsibleforthereducedhatchrate.However,therecorddoesnotbear N  outthecourtsassumptionthatappellantsconductreducedthehatchrate.Infact,the @ Austrianbreederfromwhomappellantacquiredtheeggshadahatchratenobetterthan 2 thatachievedbytheappellant.Further,therewasnoevidencethatappellantexpected $t morebirdstohatchandsurvivethanthethreeheactuallygot.Nonetheless,thecourt f valuedeggsthatdidnothatchthesameaseggsthatdidhatch,eventhoughtheeggsthat X didnothatchwereofnovaluetotheappellantoranyoneelseandshouldnothavebeen J countedaspartoftheloss. <    ` Further,inapplyingthehypotheticalhatchratethecourtforgottofactorin !. thefertilityrateincorrectlyassumingalltwelveeggswerefertileandcouldproducebirds #   wheninfactonlysixeggswerefertile.Thiserrorresultedinaseveralthousanddollar %!" overageinthevaluationoftheeggs. '#$    ` Lastly,thecourtassumedthatthehatchedandunhatchedeggsshouldallbe )$& valuedatthepriceofanadultbirdforsaleintheUnitedStates.Thecourtmadethis +&( assumptionbecauseappellanthopedtoobtainbirdsforhisbusinessintheUnitedStates.  However,appellantsintendeduseofthebirdsforacommercialpurposewasalreadythe  subjectofaspecificoffensecharacteristicenhancementandthecourtshouldnothave  usedthispurposeagaintoenhancethemarketvalueoftheeggsfromeggvaluetobird   value. x    N    ARGUMENTB   ԍARGUMENT  aC    I.   X X  B+ ` hp x X(#B THEDISTRICTCOURTSHOULDHAVEUSEDTHEFAIR  MARKETRETAILVALUEOFTHEEGGSASTHEMARKET   VALUERATHERTHANAVALUEBASEDUPONHATCHEDAND   UNHATCHEDBIRDSUSINGASPECULATIVEPROBABILITY   ANALYSISUNRELATEDTOTHEFACTSOFTHECASE.B   ԍTHEDISTRICTCOURTSHOULDHAVEUSEDTHEFAIRMARKETRETAILVALUEOFTHEEGGSASTHEMARKETVALUERATHERTHANAVALUEBASEDUPONHATCHEDANDUNHATCHEDBIRDSUSINGASPECULATIVEPROBABILITYANALYSISUNRELATEDTOTHEFACTSOFTHECASE.  cC   x   X XH.` hp x (#X H   ` Appellantspositioninthedistrictcourtwasthatthecourtshouldusethe j  numberofeggsmultipliedbythevalueofeachofthetwelveeggsbroughtintotheUnited \  Statesasthe marketvalueoftheeggs.IER45,125.Thegovernmentspositionwas N  thatthecourtshouldusethevalueofanadultbirdmultipliedbythenumberofeggsas @ themarketvalue.IER112.Atthesentencinghearing,thedistrictcourtdeterminedegg 2 valuebymultiplyingthenumberofeggsbythehatchrateunderidealconditionsbythe $t priceofanadultbirdintheUnitedStates(12x[.6or.7]x$2,500)tocomeupwith f valuesof$18,000or$21,000fortheeggs.IER139. X    ` Oneneedonlylookatthevaluethatappellantactuallyobtainedfromhis J smuggling,threebirdsworth$7,500minusthecostofraisingthem,toseehowinflated < thevaluesobtainedbythecourtwereinthiscase.Theeggsthatdidnothatchhadno !. value.Thecourtincalculatingmarketvalueusedaformulawithincorrectmultipliers #   andvariableswhichgrosslyinflatedthemarketvalueoftheeggs. %!"  P B+` ` hp x (#X(#B  A. ` TheStandardofReviewisDeNovo.B   ԍTheStandardofReviewisDeNovo.  kC   '#$  P E.` hp x (#` X(#E   ` Thecourtofappealsreviewsdenovowhetherthedistrictcourtappliedan  impropermeasureofvalueincalculating lossundertheguidelines.See,e.g.,United  Statesv.Kelly,993F.2d702,704(9thCir.1993).   P B+` ` hp x (#X(#B  B. ` TheMarketValueofSmuggledWildlifeistheFairMarketRetailPrice.B   ԍTheMarketValueofSmuggledWildlifeistheFairMarketRetailPrice.  anC      l<`  P E.` hp x (#` X(#E   ` Appellantpledguiltytoaviolationof18U.S.C.545,whichprovidesin x  pertinentpart: WhoeverfraudulentlyorknowinglyimportsorbringsintotheUnited j  States,anymerchandisecontrarytolaw...shallbefinedunderthistitleorimprisoned \  notmorethan20years,orboth.Federalwildlifeandwildliferelatedcrimescommitted N  byanindividual,ClassAmisdemeanorsorfelonies,includingsmugglingviolations @ involvingwildlife(18U.S.C.545),haveabaseoffenselevelof6,pursuanttoU.S.S.G. 2 Section2Q2.1(OffensesInvolvingFish,Wildlife,Plants).%:21appellanXJX%   2     :hXJWebb,ProsecutingWildlife $t Traffickers:ImportantCases,ManyTools,GoodResults,2ResCommunes:Vt's.J.Env't  2,26.Section2Q2.1(b)(3)(A)providesthat [i]fthemarketvalueofthefish,wildlife,or  plants(i)exceeded$2,000butdidnotexceed$5,000,increaseby1level;or(ii)exceeded  $5,000,increasebythenumberoflevelsfromthetablein2B1.1(Theft,Property   Destruction,andFraud).[Italicsadded.] x     ` ApplicationNote4tosection2Q2.1provides: Wheninformationis j  reasonablyavailable,"marketvalue"undersubsection(b)(3)(A)shallbebasedonthe \  fairmarketretailprice.Wherethefairmarketretailpriceisdifficulttoascertain,the N  courtmaymakeareasonableestimateusinganyreliableinformation,suchasthe @ reasonablereplacementorrestitutioncostortheacquisitionandpreservation(e.g., 2 taxidermy)cost. [T]helanguageofApplicationNote4isauthoritativeandconstitutesa $t bindinginterpretationofthemeaningof marketvaluewithin2Q2.1(b)(3)(A). f UnitedStatesv.Eyoum,84F.3d1004,1007(7thCir.1996). X  P ]+` ` hp x (# XhpX (#]  C. ` TheFairMarketRetailPriceWasEasilyAscertainedByReferencetothe J EstablishedMarketValueoftheEggs.B   ԍTheFairMarketRetailPriceWasEasilyAscertainedByReferencetotheEstablishedMarketValueoftheEggs. ev zC   C  P E.` hp x (#` X(#E <`    ` Thefairmarketvalueoftheeggswaseasilyascertainablebecausethe  5 partiesstipulatedtothevalueofabird($2,500),andreliableexperttestimonyestablished "' thataneggwasworth10percentthevalueofabird.IER61.Theestimatetheexpert $ ! gaveforthecostofaneggwas$200to$250.1ER6465.Theexpertsestimateofthe & "# pricepereggseemedhighinrelationshiptoeggpricesquotedinCanadawhichwereat (#% mostabout6percentthevalueofabird(i.e.,$5to$25aneggfora$400bird).IER61.%:32appellanXJX%   3     :hXJ  Nonetheless,usingtheexpertsvaluationthemarketvalueoftwelveeggswouldbe  $2,400to$3,000.     ` InUnitedStatesv.Oehlenschlager,76F.3d227(8thCir.1996),the   defendantwasconvictedofillegallyimportingbirdeggs.Therewasnoascertainable x  marketfromwhichtodetermineamarketvaluefortheeggs,sothedistrictcourt j  calculatedthemarketvaluebymultiplyingthenumberofeggsbythepriceperbirdona \  pricelistpreparedbythedefendant.TheEighthCircuitupheldtheDistrictCourtfinding N  thevaluationwasreasonableintheabsenceofanyreliableinformationoneggprice.Id. @ at230.IncontrasttoOehlenschlager,therewasreliableevidenceonthemarketpriceof 2 theeggsandnoreliableevidencethatthemarketpricefortheeggswasequaltothatof $t  livebirds.Ibid.Accordingly,thecourtshouldhaveusedeggpriceforthemarketvalue. f  P  <%` ` hp xX(#<& f    D. ` TheMarketValueEnhancementforthePriceofAdultEagle  OwlsDidNotHaveaSufficientNexustotheOffenseof  SmugglingEggs.B   ԍTheMarketValueEnhancementforthePriceofAdultEagleOwlsDidNotHaveaSufficientNexustotheOffenseofSmugglingEggs. ev…C     P  E.` hp x (#` XxE   ` Specificoffensecharacteristicenhancements,suchasthemarketvalue  enhancementinthiscase,musthavea nexuswiththeoffense.TheEighthCircuithas   applied therelevantconductconceptwhenconsideringthenexusbetweentheoffense x  ofconvictionandanenhancementbasedonaspecificoffensecharacteristic.United j  Statesv.Plumley207F.3d1086,1091(8thCir.2000) Relevantconductincludesall \   actsoromissionscommitted...bythedefendant...thatoccurredduringthe N  commissionoftheoffenseofconviction,inpreparationforthatoffense,orinthecourse @ ofattemptingtoavoiddetectionorresponsibilityforthatoffense.U.S.S.G. 2 1B1.3(a)(1).Ibid.'fĄ $t    ` Appellantsoffensewassmugglingeggsandnotbirds.ThisCourthasheld f thatordinarily [a]crimeiscompletewheneachelementofthecrimehasoccurred. X UnitedStatesv.Smith,740F.2d734,736(9thCir.1984);seealsoUnitedStatesv.Lopez, J 484F.3d1186(9thCir.2007).Inthiscase,thecrimeofsmugglingwascompletewhen < theeggsarrivedintheUnitedStates.SeeUnitedStatesv.Lemper,319F.Supp.249,251 !. [crimeofsmugglingmarijuanacompletewhenthepackagearrivedashore].Thehatching #   ofthebirdsdidnotoccurinpreparationfororduringtheactofsmugglingtheeggs. %!" Aftertheactofsmugglingoccurred,appellantexpendedhisowntime,effort,andmoney '#$  toincubatetheeggsandcareforthebirdsuntiltheyreachedadulthood.Thoseactivities )$& afterthecrimewascompletecannotbeusedtoenhancehissentenceunderaspecific  offensecharacteristicenhancement.   P B+` ` hp x (#X(#B  E. ` TheDistrictCourts ExpectedValueCalculationofFairMarketRetail  ValueIsFlawedB   ԍTheDistrictCourtsExpectedValueCalculationofFairMarketRetailValueIsFlawed evC  .    P E.` hp x (#` X(#E   ` TheDistrictCourtusedwhatisknownasan expectedvalueformulato   calculatethevalueoftheeggs.Theformulasheusedwas(hatchrateunderideal q   conditions)x(numberofeggs)x(valueofanadultbird).IER91,138139.Thecourts c  rationaleforusingahatchrateunderidealconditionswasthattheappellantshouldnot U  get anybenefitbecausesomeofthemmayhavenothatchedbecauseofhowhecaredfor G theminbringingthemin.IER36.The hatchratesheusedwasthatachievedbythe 9 defenseexpertinhatchingSakerfalconsunderidealconditionsofnaturalincubationby +{ theparentbirdsfollowedbyartificialincubation.IER60,74,139.%:43ketvaluXJX%   4     :hXJThecourtthought m thatUnitedStatesvaluesratherthanAustrianvaluesshouldbeusedbecausetheeggs _ werebroughtintotheUnitedStatesforthepurposeofhatchingbirds.IER138.From Q this,thecourtextrapolatedthatitwoulduseUnitedStatesvaluesforthebirdsthatdidnot C hatchbutmighthavehatchedunderidealconditions.IER91.Theproblemwiththe  5 courtsanalysisisthattheidealconditionshatchrateusedbythecourthadno "'  relationshiptothefactsofthecase. $ !    ` InusingUnitedStatesvaluesforthebirds,thecourtshouldhavecalculated   theprobabilitiesbasedupontheprobabilityofabirdhatchingintheUnitedStatesunder  theactualratherthanidealconditions.Theretailmarketpriceawillingselleranda  willingbuyerwouldpayfortheeggswouldbedependentuponthenumberofeggs   expectedtohatchintheUnitedStates.SeeUnitedStatesv.Heuer,749F.Supp.1541, x  1543[marketvalueofwildlifeisretailpriceintheordinarycourseofbusiness].The j  defendantcertainlydidnotexpectthenumberofbirdstohatchaswouldhavehatched \  underidealconditionsbecausehisconditionswerefarfromideal.Awillingbuyerwould N  nothavepaidmoremoneyfortheeggsinAustriathanhewouldhaveexpectedtoobtain @ fromtheeggsoncetheyhatchedintheUnitedStates,butthecourtscalculationassumed 2 thatthiswouldbethecase. $t    ` Undertheguidelines, [l]ossdoesnotincludetheinterestthatcouldhave f beenearnedhadthefundsnotbeenstolen.USSG,2B1.1,18U.S.C.A;Historical X Notesfor2001Amendments.IftheeggshadbeenleftinAustriaratherthantakentothe J UnitedStates,thenitispossiblesomeoftheeggswouldhavehatchedandtheAustrian < breedercouldhavesoldthemcheaply.However,thepossibilitythatmorebirdsmight !. havehatchediftheeggshadnotbeenstolenshouldnotbefactoredintothedetermination #   ofvalue.Andevenifthecourtcouldassesssomevalueforeggsthatmighthavehatched %!" inAustria,theappellantcertainlyshouldnotbecharged$2,500foranunhatchedeggthat '#$  mighthavegarnered$150ifithadhatchedinAustria. )$&    ` Additionally,thehatchratealsowouldhavebeenlowerthanthatusedby   thedistrictcourtbecausetheconditionsunderwhichtheeggsweretransportedwerenot  ideal.Thedefenseexperttestifiedthathewassurprisedthedefendantgotanyeggsto  hatchatall.IER58.ThedefendantcouldnotbringeggstotheUnitedStatesunderideal   conditions.Hecouldnotputanincubatoronaplane.Ifappellanthadnottakentheeggs, x  theeggsthatwouldhaveremainedatthebreedersfarminAustriaandwouldhavehad j  nogreaterlikelihoodofsurvivalthantheconditionsonthefarmallowed.Thebreeder \  was downsizinghisEagleOwlbusinessbecausethebirdswerenotsellingandhad N  ceasedusingartificialincubationtoincreasethehatchrate.Asaresult,thefertilityrate @ wasdownto50percentasopposedto70or80percentunderidealconditions.IIER45; 2 AmendedPresentenceInvestigationReportat7.XJX:%hXJ54ketvaluXJX%   5     :hXJIfappellanthadnottakenanyeggs $t fromtheAustrianfarmer,about25percentwouldhavehatchedwithavalueof$150or f less.IIER48,68,7172.Appellantshatchratewasalso25percent,threeoutoftwelve. X    ` Additionally,initscalculations,theDistrictCourtforgottofactorinthe J probabilitythataneggisfertile,takinginsteadtheprobabilitythatafertileeggwillhatch. <  Inotherwords,thecourtimplicitlyassumeda100percentprobabilitythattheeggswere !. fertile.65ketvaluXJX:   6     :hXJThisassumptionfindsnosupportintherecord.Thedefenseexpertindicatedthat   hisaveragefertilityrateforSakerfalconsunderidealconditionswas70or80percent  fertilityrateiftheeggswereraisedbytheparentsandthensubsequentlykeptin  incubatorsunderidealconditionsofheatandhumidity.IER74.Thiswasfarbetterthan   theactualfertilityrateoftheeggsthatappellantacquiredwhichwas50percent.IIER x  48,7172.XJX:%hXJ76ketvaluXJX%   7     :hXJ j     ` Ifthecourthadfactoredinthefertilityrateintothe expectedvalueofthe \  eggs,theformulathecourtwouldhaveusedwouldhavebeenasfollows: N  EV=NxPhxVc,where @ xisamultiplicationsign, 2 EVistheexpectedvalueoftheeggs, $t Phistheprobabilitythataneggwillhatch,and f ЀVcisthevalueofanewlyhatchedchick. X Thisformulaissimilartothefamous"negligenceformula"developedbyJudgeLearned J Hand(UnitedStatesv.CarrollTowingCo.,159F.2d169,173(2ndCir.1947)referenced < inRichardA.Posner,EconomicAnalysisofLaw,3rded.(Boston:LittleBrown,1986).XJX:%hXJ87ketvaluXJX%r   8     :hXJ󀀀 !.    ` FocusingonPh,theprobabilitythataneggwillhatch,thisvalueisitselfa  functionoftwootherprobabilitiesthatwillbecalledPfandPfh.Pfistheprobabilitythat  agiveneggisfertile.Pfhistheprobabilitythatafertileeggwillhatchandyieldalive  chick.Byawellknownprincipleinprobabilitytheory,PhistheproductofPfandPfh.   Thatis,Ph=PfxPfh. x     ` Lookingattheactualprobabilitiesinthiscase,thefertilityratewas50 j  percent.ThehatchratetheAustriansellerwasachievingwasalso50percent.IIER48, \  7172.Appellantshatchratewouldhavebeenevenlowerbecausetheeggshadno N  naturalincubationfromtheparents.IER59.Assumingarangeof20to40percentfor @ Pfh,theprobabilitythatafertileeggwouldhatch,thelowerandupperboundprobability 2 thatagiveneggwitha50percentchanceoffertilitywillhatchis0.5(thefertilityrate) $t times0.4(theestimatedmaximumprobabilityofafertileegghatchingunderbelow f optimumconditions)or0.2.Thelowerboundis0.5times0.2or0.1.Theupperbound X value,basedontheaboveestimates,wouldbe: J   12x.2x$2,500=$6,000. < Thelowerboundvalue,basedontheaboveestimates,wouldbe: !.    12x.1x$2,500=$3,000. #   Asimplesplitthedifferenceapproach,takingtheaverageofthelowerandupperbound  wouldyield,therefore,anoverallvalueof$4,500.Thisisthebottomlineoftheapproach  thecourtattemptedtoapplyinthiscase.   P B+` ` hp x (#X(#B  F. ` TheCourtsProbabilityAnalysisWasUnnecessaryBecausetheActual   OutcomeWasKnown.B   ԍTheCourtsProbabilityAnalysisWasUnnecessaryBecausetheActualOutcomeWasKnown. tcPC      P E.` hp x (#` X(#E   ` Thereasonforconductingan expectedvalueanalysisistodetermine q   valuewhentheactualoutcomeisunknown.Inthiscase,however,theactualoutcomes c  areknownandthereisnoreasontospeculateabouthowmanybirdsappellantmighthave U  acquiredfromtheeggsthatdidnothatch. G    ` Theeggshadnovalueapartfromtheirpotentialincreatinglivebirds.In 9 otherwords,theeggsonlyrepresentedaprobabilityofalivebird,andtheprobabilitywas +{ zeroforeggsthatdidnotproducebirds.If,forthesakeofargument,thecourtcoulduse m birdvalueratherthaneggvalueindeterminingmarketvalue,thentherelevanttime _ periodfordeterminingmarketvaluewasaftertheeggshadhatchedinsteadofwhenthe Q eggsarrivedintheUnitedStates.Aftertheeggshadhatched,thevaluewasthatofthe C birdsthathadhatchedandnotbirdsandunhatchedeggs.Thecourtcouldnotassign  5 valuestobothbirdsandunhatchedeggsastheunhatchedeggshadnomarketvalue "' becausetheynolongerrepresentedaprobabilityofproducingabird. $ !    ` However,useoftheactualoutcomeratherthaneggvalueagainhasthe & "# potentialforunfairresults.Imaginethattheappellanthadfiguredoutawaytoraisethe (#% probabilitythataneggwouldhatchandyieldalivebirdandthatahighnumberoflive *%' birdsresulted.Ifthatwerethecase,thenusinganexpectedvalueformulaorthevalueof  thebirdsthathadhatchedwouldyieldahighnumberforthevalueoftheeggs.In  essense,theappellantwouldbechargedwithahighervaluesimplybecausehewasgood  atincubatingbirds,notbecausehesmuggledthem.Indeed,appellantshowedsucha   proficiencyherewheretheoddswerehewouldhatchatmosttwobirdsbutheendedup x  hatchingthree. j   P B+` ` hp x (#X(#B  G. ` ConclusionB   ԍConclusion tcC   \   P E.` hp x (#` X(#E   ` Thedefendantimportedeggs,notbirds.Hehadnointenttosellthebirds N  hewouldderivefromtheeggs,andtherewasnoguarantythatanybirdswouldcomeof @ hissmugglingactivity.Thecrimeofsmugglingwascompletewhenappellantlandedon 2 Americansoilwiththeeggs.Thevalueoftheeggsinhispossessionatthatpointwas $t $2,400to$3,000.Undertheguidelines,hecouldnotbechargedwiththeincreasedvalue f afterheundertooktoincubatetheeggsbecausethisactivityoccurredafterthecrimewas X completed. J    ` Additionally,thecourtsexpectedvalueformulawasflawedandthe < variablesusedintheformulahadnorelationshiptothefacts.Acorrectapplicationofthe !. formulawiththecorrectvariablesyieldedanexpectedvalueof$4,500.Usingthecorrect #   marketvalue,thespecificoffensecharacteristicadjustmentformarketvaluewouldyield %!" a1levelincreaseratherthanthe4levelincreaseusedbythecourtU.S.S.G.2Q2.1,and '#$ appellantsadjustedoffenselevelwouldbe13yieldingarangeof1218monthsforthe )$& sentenceinsteadofthe2127monthrangethecourtusedinsentencing.U.S.S.G. +&( SentencingTable,ch.5,pt.A.Iftherelevanttimeperiodforvaluationisafterthebirds  hatchedbecauseappellantintendedtousethebirdsinhisbusiness,thentherewouldbea  twolevelmarketvalueenhancementbaseduponthe$7,500valueofthreebirdsinstead  ofafourlevelenhancement.Ibid.Accordingly,thiscourtshouldreversethejudgment   andremandthecaseforresentencing. x    N    II.    X X  ?( ` hp x X(#?Ӏ  THEENHANCEMENTSIMPOSEDFORTHEMARKETVALUE  OFTHEUNHATCHEDBIRDSANDTHEBUSINESSUSEOFTHE  HATCHEDBIRDSCONSTITUTEDIMPERMISSIBLEDOUBLE  COUNTING .B   ԍTHEENHANCEMENTSIMPOSEDFORTHEMARKETVALUEOFTHEUNHATCHEDBIRDSANDTHEBUSINESSUSEOFTHEHATCHEDBIRDSCONSTITUTEDIMPERMISSIBLEDOUBLECOUNTING. tcC       X XE.` hp x (#X E    ` TheDistrictCourtsrationaleforusingthebirdvalueinsteadoftheegg   valueasthemarketvaluewasthattheeggswere broughtinforthepurposeofhatching q   theeggsandproducingbirds.IER138.However,thecourtalsofoundthatappellant c   didintendtousetheseowlsforpurpose[sic]inhisbusiness(1ER137),andincreased U  appellantsoffenselevelbytwopointsbecauseitinvolvedacommercialpurposeunder G U.S.S.G.2Q2.1(b)(1)(A).AmendedPresentenceInvestigationReport,p.9;1ER136, 9 141. +{    ` Appellantcontendsthatthecourtsuseofappellantsintendedpurposefor m thebirdstoimposetwoenhancements,oneformarketvalueandtheotherforcommercial _ purpose,constitutedimpermissibledoublecounting.Thiscourtreviewsdenovo Q challengestotheinterpretationandapplicationoftheSentencingGuidelines.SeeUnited C Statesv.Smith196F.3d1034,1036(9thCir.1999).  5    ` Doublecountingispermissibleifitaccountsformorethanonetypeof "' harmcausedbythedefendant'sconductorwhereeachenhancementofthedefendant's $ ! sentenceservesauniquepurposeundertheguidelines.UnitedStatesv.Parker,136 & "# F.3d653,654(9thCir.1998),cert.denied,525U.S.942,119S.Ct.363,142L.Ed.2d300 (#% (1998).Here,thecourtsuseofbirdvalueforthemarketvalueandcommercialpurpose *%' enhancementsservedthesamepurpose,todeterfutureeffortsbytheappellanttoacquire  birdsforbusinesspurposes.Theharmaddressedwasalsothesamebecauseitultimately  concernedappellantsintendedusefortheeggs.     ` Theharmwouldhavebeendifferentifthecourthadusedeggvalueinstead   ofbirdvalueasthemarketvaluebecausethenthequantityofeggsimportedwouldhave x  beenatissueratherthanthereasonbehindtheimportationoftheeggs.However,inusing j  thevalueofunbornbirdstoestablishthemarketvalue,thecourtassumedthatappellants \  intenttohavemorebirdshatchforuseinhisbusinesswasofgreaterimportancethanthe N  actualquantityofbirdsheacquiredfromhisactivities.Inotherwords,thecourtvalued @ anunhatchedeggatthepriceofalivebirdbecauseappellantintendedtousethebirdifit 2 hadhatchedforabusinesspurpose.Thus,thepurposefortheuseoftheeggsdictatedthe $t marketvalueoftheeggsinsteadofthequantityandpriceoftheeggsthemselves. f    ` InUnitedStatesv.Asper,753F.Supp.1289,1291(M.D.Pa.1990),acase X involvingvariouswildlifeoffenses,theGovernmentcontendedthatthesentencing J guidelinesdidnottakeintoaccountincomederivedfromtheillegallyimportedwildlife < andthatthiscouldbeusedasgroundsforadeparturefromtheguidelines.TheDistrict !. CourtrejectedtheGovernmentsargument,opiningthat weareoftheviewthatthe #   enhancementsforcommercialpurposeandmarketvalueadequatelyaddressthis %!" concern.Id.at1291. '#$    ` Likewise,inthiscase,theenhancementforcommercialpurposeshould )$& haveadequatelyaddressedthecourtsconcernthatappellantintendedtousethebirdsfor +&( acommercialpurpose.Accordingly,thecourtshouldreversethejudgmentandremand  thematterforresentencing.       CONCLUSIONB   ԍCONCLUSION tcC         ` Usinganyofthethreepossiblealternativesforsentencinginthiscase,egg  value,expectedvalueusingactualconditions,ortheactualoutcome,thesentencerange  wouldbe1218months.Ifthecourthadusedthemarketvalueoftheeggs,therewould   havebeenaonelevelmarketvalueenhancementwithanadjustedoffenselevelof13and x  asentencerangeof1218months.Ifthecourthadusedexpectedvalueoftheeggsusing j  hatchrates,therewouldhavebeenaoneleveladjustmentformarketvalue,no \  adjustmentforcommercialpurposebecauseofdoublecounting,anadjustedoffenselevel N  of11,andasentencerangeof1218months.Iftheactualvaluesofthehatchlingshad @ beenused,therewouldhavebeenatwolevelenhancementformarketvalue,no 2 commercialpurposeenhancement,anadjustedoffenselevelof12,andasentencerange $t of1218months.Thejudgmentshouldbereversedandthismatterremandedfor f resentencing. X DATED:November7,2007 J ! (#X(#!$$4(#Respectfullysubmitted, < B.` hp x (#(#B! (#X(#!$$8(#___________________ "' >(#[INSERTNAME] #   664(#AttorneyforAppellant $ ! B.` hp x (#(#B   `    +&( ЇCERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCEB   ԍCERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCE tcTC        PursuanttoNinthCircuitRule32(a)(7),Icertifythattheaccompanyingbriefis  doublespaced,thata13pointproportionalfontwasused,andthatthereare5,919words   inthebrief.     Dated:_______________. h   ________________________ c     `     h     [nameofattorney] \     `     h  @    STATEMENTOFRELATEDCASESB   ԍCASES tceC          CounselforappellantisawareofnoothercasespendinginthisCourt  whichrelatetothisaction.   %: