Article

Note: Robert Ingram ("Ingram") claimed to direct an investment program involving "highly profitable notes issued overseas and backed by the Federal Reserve." To induce others to invest their finances with him, Ingram informed them that he "had a relationship with a former Central Intelligence Agency operative," and that the operative "had access to sophisticated and high-yield investment vehicles located abroad." Ingram's victims invested additional funds on the promise of higher returns and were encouraged by the promise of commissions to find others willing to invest their finances. Ingram ultimately received over seven million dollars from his victims and the funds were never invested.

Ingram was charged criminally for conspiracy to commit wire fraud and plead guilty without entering into a plea agreement. However, prior to sentencing, Ingram disputed certain facts relevant in determining his sentence. At his hearing, a sentence of "144 months imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release, and a mandatory USD 100 special assessment" was imposed. Ingram's appealed his sentence and it was subsequently affirmed. As a result, Ingram made a motion pro se contending that he was sentenced under incorrect guidelines, that the sentence was based on inaccurate information in violation of the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, and that he was actually innocent of the charged offenses. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Fox, M.J., recommended the motion be dismissed.

[ABS/mjb]

COPYRIGHT OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL BANKING LAW & PRACTICE

The views expressed in this Case Summary are those of the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice and not necessarily those of ICC or the other partners in DC-PRO.

This article represents the views of the author and not necessarily those of the ICC or any of the other partners in DC-PRO.