Case Explained: United States of America v. Latroy L. Currie

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-05 The eighth-circuit affirmed the sentences of Latroy Currie and Malik Marshall for conspiracy to commit bank fraud and money laundering. The defendants challenged their sentences by arguing that the district court erred in using “intended loss” rather than “actual loss” to calculate the applicable sentencing guidelines range, contending that Supreme Court precedent in *Kisor v. Wilkie* no longer supports giving controlling weight to Sentencing Guidelines commentary interpreting the term “loss.” The court applied the standard of review established in *Stinson v. United States*, which mandates that Guidelines commentary is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution, a federal statute, or is plainly erroneous. The court noted that while the Sentencing Commission amended § 2B1.1 in November 2024 to move the intended loss language from commentary to the text of the guideline, the Ex Post Facto Clause precludes applying the newer version to these defendants who were sentenced prior to the amendment. Relying on its recent decision in *United States v. Nock*, the court held that even post-*Kisor*, Eighth Circuit precedent continues to afford controlling weight to the commentary directing courts to use the greater of actual or intended loss. Consequently, the district court’s application of a 20-level enhancement based on the intended loss amounts was correct under controlling circuit authority. The judgments of the district court are affirmed, and the defendants’ sentences remain in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.