Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Imran Qurashi

March 8, 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
IMRAN QURASHI, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



Appeal from an order of restitution entered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Sandra J. Feuerstein, Judge) following Defendant-Appellant Imran Qurashi's plea of guilty to a nine-count indictment for insurance fraud.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: John M. Walker, Jr., Circuit Judge:

10-348-cr

USA v. Qurashi

Argued: November 15, 2010

21 Before : NEWMAN, WALKER, and POOLER, Circuit Judges.

Qurashi argues it was error for the district court to add 28 prejudgment interest to the restitution awarded to the defrauded 29 insurers. We hold that a prejudgment interest award can be 30 included in a criminal restitution order to ensure that a victim's losses are fully compensated. We also remand to allow 2 the district court to conform the statement of reasons supporting 3 the sentence to Qurashi's stipulation with the government.

4 AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

Defendant-Appellant Imran Qurashi ("Qurashi") appeals from a 18 January 16, 2010 order of restitution entered by the United 19 States District Court for the Eastern District of New York 20 (Sandra J. Feuerstein, Judge) following his guilty plea to a 21 nine-count indictment charging him with insurance fraud. Qurashi 22 argues that the district court abused its discretion by including 23 prejudgment interest in the restitution awarded to the defrauded 24 insurers. We affirm the district court's judgment and hold that 25 prejudgment interest can be awarded in a criminal restitution 26 order to ensure that a victim's losses are fully compensated. We 27 reject Qurashi's argument that he was prejudiced by the district 28 court's failure to determine the victims' losses within the 90- 29 day statutory window. Finally, we remand to allow the district 30 court to conform the statement of reasons supporting the sentence 2 1 to Qurashi's stipulation with the government.

3 BACKGROUND

4 Qurashi twice faked his brother's death to collect millions 5 of dollars in life insurance proceeds; it was only after the 6 second time that he was caught. In 1993 and 1994, Qurashi and 7 his brother, Adnan Qurashi ("Adnan"), purchased two $3 million 8 life insurance policies on Adnan's life from the Metropolitan 9 Life Insurance Company ("MetLife") and New York Life Insurance 10 Company ("New York Life"). In 1995, Qurashi submitted claims to 11 both companies that falsely asserted that Adnan had died in a car 12 accident in Pakistan. The following year, the insurers paid 13 Qurashi more than $6 million on the policies. 14 Adnan, still very much alive, returned to the United States 15 from Pakistan in November 1998, whereupon he assumed a new 16 identity as Qurashi's fictitious cousin "Hassan Khan." Flushed 17 with success, Qurashi upped the ante: between 2000 and 2004, he 18 purchased eight $10 million life insurance policies on Hassan 19 Khan's life from four insurance companies. History repeated 20 itself in 2004: Hassan Khan was purportedly killed in a traffic 21 accident in Pakistan, and Qurashi falsely claimed proceeds on all 22 eight policies. This time, however, the insurance companies 23 refused to pay and opened investigations.

24 An indictment returned on June 28, 2005 charged Qurashi and 1 Adnan with one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and eight 2 counts of mail fraud. Adnan remains a fugitive. After Qurashi 3 entered a guilty plea, District Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein 4 sentenced him in October 2008 to concurrent imprisonment terms of 5 60 months on the conspiracy charge and 108 months on the mail 6 fraud charges, plus three years of supervised release. Judge 7 Feuerstein deferred the determination of restitution, at the 8 government's request, to allow time to ensure that every 9 insurance company had been accounted for. Qurashi agreed to 10 waive his right to appeal the sentence "as long as the sentence 11 is 121 months or less." The government concedes, however, that 12 because Qurashi's waiver referred only to the prison term, it 13 does not bar this appeal from the restitution order.

14 On January 22, 2009, the government submitted a proposed 15 order of restitution, to which Qurashi objected. Judge 16 Feuerstein referred the determination of restitution to 17 Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson, who held a hearing and 18 issued a report and recommendation. The district court adopted 19 the report and recommendation, and rejected Qurashi's objections. 20 Judge Feuerstein entered judgment and signed a "Statement of 21 Reasons" regarding Qurashi's sentence on January 16, 2010, and 22 shortly thereafter overruled Qurashi's objection that the 23 restitution order was untimely. The order included prejudgment 24 interest at a rate of 4 percent. This appeal, confined to the 4 1 restitution order, followed.

3 DISCUSSION

4 Qurashi argues that the district court erred by including 5 prejudgment interest in its restitution award to New York Life 6 and MetLife. Because the insurers failed to demonstrate how 7 their money would have been used if it had not been paid out to 8 Qurashi, he contends that prejudgment interest compensates the 9 insurers for more than their actual losses. Qurashi further 10 claims that he was prejudiced by the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.