The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the sentences of Latroy Currie and Malik Marshall, who were leaders of a significant bank fraud conspiracy. The court ruled on August 5, 2026, in case numbers 25-2666 and 25-3141. This ruling affects both defendants, who were involved in a scheme that attempted to defraud banks of millions of dollars.
The court's decision is important as it reinforces the legal principles surrounding sentencing in fraud cases. It clarifies how courts should calculate losses when determining sentences for financial crimes, particularly regarding intended versus actual loss amounts.
Background
Latroy Currie, also known as Mook, and Malik Marshall, who is also known as Thang or M. Thang, were co-defendants in this case. Both men were involved in a large-scale bank fraud scheme that lasted several years. Currie was a founding member of the conspiracy, participating from December 2021 until at least August 2024. He pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1344 and 1349.
Marshall joined the conspiracy no later than January 2023 and also pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank fraud and money laundering. The conspiracy involved acquiring stolen checks, creating fake businesses, and opening fraudulent bank accounts to deposit these checks. The group attempted to deposit at least $15 million and successfully obtained over $2.9 million in fraudulent proceeds. The case reached the Eighth Circuit after both defendants appealed their sentences, arguing that the district court made an error in calculating the intended loss for sentencing purposes.
The Ruling
The Eighth Circuit, led by Circuit Judge Loken, ruled that the district court did not err in using the intended loss amount to calculate the advisory sentencing guidelines range for both Currie and Marshall. The court stated, "The district court correctly followed controlling Eighth Circuit precedent when it considered intended loss in calculating Currie and Marshall’s offense levels." This ruling affirmed the district court's decision to apply a 20-level enhancement based on the intended loss amounts outlined in their Presentence Investigation Reports (PSRs).
Currie was sentenced to 135 months in prison, while Marshall received a 188-month sentence for his bank fraud offenses and an additional 120 months for money laundering. The court emphasized that the Sentencing Guidelines allow for an enhancement based on the greater of actual or intended loss, a principle that has been upheld in previous cases.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for future bank fraud cases and how courts handle sentencing. By affirming the use of intended loss in calculating sentences, the Eighth Circuit reinforces the importance of deterring large-scale financial crimes. The decision also highlights the court's adherence to established precedents, ensuring consistency in how similar cases are treated.
Moreover, the ruling may affect how defendants approach their appeals in financial crime cases. With the court's clear stance on the use of intended loss, defendants may find it more challenging to argue against the enhancements applied during sentencing. This case serves as a reminder of the serious consequences of engaging in fraud schemes, particularly those involving large sums of money.
What's Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Currie and Marshall plan to appeal this decision further. However, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari to address a related issue concerning the interpretation of Sentencing Guidelines, which could impact future cases.