# United States v. Lawrence R. Gottfried

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · June 27, 1995 · 58 F.3d 648

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9488228

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Lawrence R. GOTTFRIED, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** June 27, 1995
- **Citations:** 58 F.3d 648; 313 U.S. App. D.C. 88; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 15805; 1995 WL 376179
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Henderson
- **Judges:** Silberman, Henderson, Randolph
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9488228

## Opinion text

KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I fully agree with the majority opinion. Because the property loss valuation provisions of the Guidelines are a bad fit for the kind of crime committed here (in that they focus on the value of the property taken or damaged rather than the extent of actual harm caused by the criminal activity), however, I write to point out an alternative approach. The Guidelines provide for an upward departure where “the monetary value of the property damaged or destroyed may not adequately reflect the extent of the harm caused.” See United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2B1.3 application note 4. Of particular relevance here, the Guidelines also provide that “[i]f the defendant’s conduct resulted in a significant disruption of a govern *654 mental function, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range to reflect the nature and extent of the disruption and the importance of the governmental function affected.” Id. § 5K2.7.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9488228. Public record. Not legal advice.