## Facts

- Nicky J. Tampas served as president and executive director of the YMCA of Valdosta–Lowndes County, overseeing daily operations, finances, and reporting to the board.
- Tampas worked closely with the YMCA finance director, who handled payroll, accounts payable, and the American Express account for which Tampas was the listed representative.
- Tampas hired a contractor and the contractor’s landscaping company to perform YMCA work and also to perform landscaping and home improvements at Tampas’s personal residence.
- Tampas arranged for the contractor’s employees to be paid by the YMCA as “contractors” through a process not authorized by the YMCA board.
- Contractor-related payments were supported by handwritten slips listing names and amounts rather than standard invoices; those bills were processed through a limited internal channel rather than ordinary bookkeeping practices.
- The YMCA later discovered unpaid payroll tax liabilities of roughly $1.4 million (plus penalties) after learning withheld payroll taxes had not been remitted; the finance director was terminated and later convicted on federal charges.
- As the FBI and YMCA officials reviewed records, they identified additional irregularities, including undocumented payments to the contractor, endorsements of YMCA checks by Tampas to the contractor, and significant American Express charges without supporting documentation.
- After scrutiny increased, a subordinate testified Tampas asked him to prepare a spreadsheet attributing the contractor’s vague receipts to YMCA projects; the subordinate refused, believing the amounts exceeded the value of the work and that the spreadsheet would mislead.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for conspiracy to commit embezzlement and embezzlement from an organization receiving federal funds under 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 666.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for misleading conduct intended to hinder communication to federal law enforcement under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3).
3. Whether challenged evidentiary and trial-management rulings, including denial of a mistrial, required reversal.
4. Whether the sentence—particularly the restitution calculation—was legally and factually correct.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Tampas’s convictions on all counts.
- The court held the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, permitted a reasonable jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for § 666 embezzlement, § 371 conspiracy, and § 1512(b)(3) misleading conduct.
- The court found no reversible error in the district court’s evidentiary and trial-management rulings and no abuse of discretion in denying a mistrial.
- The court affirmed the prison terms but vacated the restitution portion of the sentence because the restitution amount was incorrectly calculated.
- The case was remanded for resentencing limited to correcting restitution.

## Legal Principles

- On sufficiency review, appellate courts view evidence in the light most favorable to the government and uphold the verdict if a reasonable factfinder could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; intent may be proven through circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences.
- Unusual payment practices, lack of documentation, deviations from standard financial controls, and evidence of personal benefit can support findings of knowing participation and intent for embezzlement from a federally funded organization under 18 U.S.C. § 666 and related conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371.
- 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3) is satisfied when a defendant knowingly engages in misleading conduct toward another person with intent to hinder, delay, or prevent communication to a federal law enforcement officer or judge about the commission or possible commission of a federal offense.
- Efforts to create a retroactive explanatory record to make questionable transactions appear legitimate can constitute “misleading conduct” under § 1512(b)(3) when the factfinder can infer an intent to impede reporting to federal authorities.
- Trial rulings warrant reversal only when prejudice clearly affected the jury and amounted to denial of a fair trial; mistrial decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Restitution must reflect a correct calculation tied to the loss attributable to the offense conduct; an incorrect restitution amount requires vacatur and remand for recalculation.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit sustained the jury’s findings that circumstantial evidence supported Tampas’s participation in embezzlement and conspiracy and that his effort to generate a reconciliatory spreadsheet could be found misleading under § 1512(b)(3) with intent to impede reporting to federal authorities; it affirmed the convictions and imprisonment but vacated and remanded solely to correct the restitution amount.


United States v. Tampas, 493 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2007)