mid-Guideline range, was

USA v. RAJWANI No. 0510648cr1p - 02/23/2007

In sum, we conclude that the financial vulnerability of

victims and the related emotional hardship make this case somewhat
atypical and justify an upward departure. However, the Sentencing
Commission has substantially accounted for these aggravating
characteristics of the defendant’s conduct by providing for a
vulnerable victim enhancement and an enhancement based on the
amount of the fraud. While we recognize the deference due a
district court’s sentence, we find no circumstance in this case
that takes it so far beyond the heartland of fraud offenses as to
“eviscerate the Guidelines of all applicability.” The district
court’s sentence, which is 3 times the mid-Guideline range, was
therefore unreasonable. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM Rajwani’s conviction.
However, we VACATE Rajwani’s sentence and REMAND the case to the
district court for resentencing consistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED IN PART.
VACATED IN PART.
REMANDED.