USA v. Carlos Montoya

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 19-13158
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:18-cr-20393-MGC-2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CARLOS MONTOYA,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(May 13, 2021)
Before MARTIN, BRANCH, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
USCA11 Case: 19-13158 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 Page: 1 of 4

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Carlos Montoya appeals his total 97-month sentence imposed after the jury
found Montoya guilty of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1349, and of federal program bribery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 666.
Montoya also appeals the district court’s restitution award. Montoya has filed an
unopposed motion for summary reversal and a motion for a stay of the briefing
schedule.
Briefly stated, Montoya’s convictions stem from Montoya’s involvement in
a scheme to defraud the government. Montoya and Sandra Ruballo conspired to
submit inflated claims for reimbursement under the Child Care Food Program
(“CCFP”), a federally-funded program designed to provide nutritious meals to
underprivileged children at daycare centers. As part of the scheme, Ruballo -- in
exchange for kickbacks from Montoya -- rigged the bidding process to ensure that
Montoya’s catering company received the government catering contracts.
The district court conducted a combined sentencing hearing for Montoya
and for Ruballo. At the conclusion of the hearing, the district court sentenced
Montoya to 97 months’ imprisonment and sentenced Ruballo to 120 months’
imprisonment. The district court also ordered Montoya and Ruballo to pay
restitution in the amount of $12,962,399 and $13,231,277, respectively.
USCA11 Case: 19-13158 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 Page: 2 of 4

-- 2 of 4 --

3
We later vacated Ruballo’s sentence and remanded for the district court to
reconsider and to explain more fully its calculation of the loss amount attributable
to Ruballo and of the amount of restitution owed. See United States v. Ruballo,
833 F. App’x 275, 283 (11th Cir. 2020) (unpublished). We concluded that --
absent other supporting evidence or explanation -- the district court’s reliance on
an email listing the amounts of restitution purportedly owed by Ruballo and by
Montoya allowed for no meaningful appellate review.
In the light of our decision in Ruballo, Montoya moves for summary
reversal. Montoya seeks to challenge the district court’s calculation of the amount
of loss and the amount of restitution owed on the same grounds raised on direct
appeal by Ruballo.
Summary disposition may be appropriate when “the position of one of the
parties is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial
question as to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406
F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
Under the law-of-the-case doctrine, our decision in Ruballo -- concluding
that the record allowed no meaningful appellate review of the district court’s
calculation of the loss amount and the amount of restitution owed -- applies equally
to the identical issue now raised by Montoya. See United States v. Siegelman, 786
USCA11 Case: 19-13158 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 Page: 3 of 4

-- 3 of 4 --

4
F.3d 1322, 1327 (11th Cir. 2015) (recognizing that the law-of-the-case doctrine
“applies to those issues decided on a co-defendant’s earlier but closely related
appeal.”). Under these circumstances, summary reversal is appropriate.
Accordingly, we GRANT Montoya’s motion for summary reversal, vacate
his sentence, and remand for the district court to explain more fully its calculation
of the amount of loss attributable to Montoya and the amount of restitution owed
by Montoya. We DENY as moot Montoya’s motion to stay the briefing schedule.
USCA11 Case: 19-13158 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 Page: 4 of 4

-- 4 of 4 --