164420P.pdf   02/02/2018  United States  v.  Mark Arlin Hammerschmidt
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-4420
                          and No:  16-4422
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul   
   [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Shepherd, Circuit Judge, and Goldberg, 
   Judge of the United States Court of International Trade] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not determine whether 
   defendant Mark Hammerschmidt managed or supervised another participant in 
   the conspiracy to commit file false tax returns on behalf of Guatemalan 
   citizens, and the matter must be remanded to give the court an opportunity 
   to clarify whether defendant did organize or lead at least one other 
   participant under Guidelines Sec. 3B1.1; the defendant's Florida contempt 
   disposition did not meet the definition of a prior sentence because he 
   purged the contempt by paying past-due support payments and was never 
   adjudicated guilty; as a result, the district court erred in assessing two 
   criminal history points for the adjudication. With respect to defendant 
   Ornella Hammerschmidt,the district court did not err in applying an 
   enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2T1.4(b)(1)(B) for being in the business 
   of preparing or assisting in the preparation of tax returns; nor did the 
   court err in relying on victim impact as a reason to vary above the 
   Guidelines range after it found defendant's conduct had a serious impact 
   on her victims; nor did the court err in relying on defendant's criminal 
   history as a reason for an upward variance; the court would not address an 
   issue raised for the first time in the reply brief.