United States of America v. ALBERINO MAGI, AKA Ron Anderson, AKA Robert Knowles, AKA Alberiono Magi, AKA Rino,…

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ALBERINO MAGI, AKA Ron Anderson,
AKA Robert Knowles, AKA Alberiono
Magi, AKA Rino, AKA Glen Ross, AKA
Robert Ross,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-50020
D.C. No.
2:07-cr-01402-SJO-4
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 14, 2019**
Pasadena, California
FILED
AUG 16 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 3 --

Before: SCHROEDER and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and WATSON,*** District
Judge.
Alberino Magi appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea for
conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. Magi
admitted to being a member of a fraudulent telemarketing scheme and was
sentenced to 15 months’ custody, three years’ supervised release, and $286,230
restitution to the victims.
Magi argues that the district court abused its discretion when calculating his
sentencing guideline range and the restitution he owed. Although Magi contends
that he is not liable for defrauding all of the victims because he did not rely on
other telemarketers to execute the telemarketing scheme, the record clearly reflects
that Magi and the telemarketers worked together.
An individual named Bellini obtained and distributed the names of potential
victims to Magi. Magi contacted the victims by telephone and falsely informed
them that they had won a large sum of money in a lottery, but needed to pay the
taxes and administrative fees in order to collect their winnings. Magi and the other
telemarketers worked in groups of two or more, playing different roles to convince
victims to send money. For example, Magi’s co-defendant Van Wade Bedford
*** The Honorable Michael H. Watson, United States District Judge for
the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
2

-- 2 of 3 --

made calls to a victim pretending to be Magi’s supervisor. Bellini thereafter
collected the funds and distributed them to Magi and the other telemarketers.
Magi is therefore liable for the fraudulent acts of the other telemarketers
because he relied on them to make a sale and depended on the success of the entire
scheme for his financial gain. See United States v. Lloyd, 807 F.3d 1128, 1143
(9th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, there was no error in the calculation of the
guidelines range or restitution.
AFFIRMED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --