Judge Pierre Leval
Stringer was principally sentenced to 60 months in prison, and ordered to pay $104,731 in restitution, after a jury found him guilty—under a June 30, 2011, superseding indictment—of bank fraud violating 18 USC §1344 (Count One) and aggravated identity theft violating 18 USC §§1028(a)(1) and (c)(5) (Count Two). Second Circuit affirmed district court, rejecting Stringer’s assertions that Count Two—the aggravated identity theft count—was constitutionally deficient. It also rejected Stringer’s claim that the superseding indictment substantially altered the nature of the allegations made from those in the original indictment against him, such that district court abused its discretion when it denied his request for a continuance so as to prepare to defend against the new charges. Distinguishing Russell v. United States and United States v. Resendiz-Ponce, the circuit concluded that regardless of the failure of Stringer’s indictment to name the persons whose identification were used to commit bank fraud, the indictment was constitutionally adequate. It further determined that although the superseding indictment’s language altered some aspects of the description of the charges against Stringer, such essentially “ministerial” changes were insignificant.
