Case Summaries
White Collar Crime
[08/26]
US v. Prince
Conviction of defendant for conspiracy to commit money laundering and multiple counts of money laundering, in connection with fraudulent claims for payment for physical therapy services provided to Medicare beneficiaries, is affirmed where: 1) the evidence at trial was sufficient to establish that the defendant committed, or conspired to commit, money laundering by conducting, or aiding and abetting another in conducting, the specified financial transactions knowing that they involved the proceeds of Medicare fraud; 2) a reasonable person would not question the judge's impartiality toward defendant because a government witness was represented by an attorney who previously represented the judge in a prior unrelated matter; and 3) district court did no abuse its discretion by refusing to require the government to provide a pretrial disclosure of its exhibit list.
[08/19]
US v. Kottwitz
Defendants' convictions for tax fraud-related charges are affirmed in part where the circumstantial evidence was sufficient for the jury to have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that defendants entered into the charged conspiracy. However, the convictions are vacated in part where: 1) the district court erred in refusing to give defendants' requested special instruction to the jury on their good faith reliance on their accountant's advice; and 2) the evidence was insufficient for a properly instructed jury to convict on the charge of aiding and assisting in the filing of a materially false corporate tax return.
[08/18]
US v. Holstein
Conviction of defendant for bankruptcy fraud and making false statements in bankruptcy petitions, based on providing bankruptcy services at his law firm while on suspension for professional conduct, is affirmed as the evidence was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the essential elements of both 18 U.S.C. section 157(1) and 18 U.S.C. section 1519.
[08/12]
US v. Kumar
Defendants' convictions and sentences for conspiracy, securities and wire fraud, obstruction of justice, and perjury are affirmed in part where: 1) regardless of whether defendant's false testimony violated 18 U.S.C. section 1512(c)(2), it plainly violated section 1503(a), and the indictment charged at least that offense; 2) the Fifth Amendment did not protect false testimony; and 3) application of the 2005 Guidelines to defendants' fraud offenses, which were completed in 2000, did not violate the Ex Post Facto clause. However, one defendant's sentence is vacated where the district court erroneously failed to award defendant a two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility that he should have received.
[08/11]
US v. Cantrell
District court's conviction of defendant for honest services fraud, for using his position in public office to steer contracts to a third party in exchange for kickbacks, and other crimes, and sentence of 78 months' imprisonment are affirmed where: 1) defendant's award of contracts was clearly a kickback scheme, so section 1346 - even as pared down by Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. __, 2010 WL 2518587 (2010) - applies to defendant; 2) the district court did not err in applying U.S.S.G. section 2C1.1; and 3) there is no evidence that the district judge committed procedural error or otherwise acted unreasonably in imposing a within-guidelines sentence.
[08/05]
US v. Straw
Defendant's sentence for wire fraud, mail fraud, making, possessing, and uttering a forged security, and money laundering is affirmed where: 1) it was not plain error for the district court to hear defendant's family member's statement because the statement concerned defendant's background, character, and conduct; 2) given the fact that the victims of defendant's wills-and-estate-planning scheme overlapped with the victims of other schemes, and that defendant used those seminars to find new victims for his other crimes and assess their financial situations, it was not clearly erroneous for the district court to determine they were part of the same course of conduct; and 3) the district court was aware of defendant's mental health issues and there was no evidence it disregarded them in varying upward.
[07/29]
US v. Mullins
Defendants' wire fraud convictions and sentences are affirmed where: 1) a "new or increased risk of loss" was plainly a material, detrimental effect on a financial institution, and fell squarely within the proper scope of the statute; 2) the statute of limitations did not expire as to certain offenses because the jury could find that, by using fraudulent information to obtain loans, defendant and her customers exposed the companies to a greater risk of loss that persisted at least until extinguished by the final loan payment; and 3) the use of interstate wires was integral to defendants' fraudulent scheme.
[07/28]
US v. Faulkenberry
Conviction of defendant for securities fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, and conspiracies to commit these crimes is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) sufficient proof supported defendant's wire fraud, securities fraud, and conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud convictions; 2) defendant's money laundering conviction is reversed as, to prove a violation of money laundering pursuant to section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i), it is not enough for the government to prove merely that a transaction had a concealing effect or that the transaction was structured to conceal the nature of illicit funds, but rather, what is required is that concealment be an animating purpose of the transaction; 3) defendant's conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering is reversed; 4) defendant's remaining claims are rejected as meritless; and 5) defendant's sentence is vacated and remanded for resentencing.
[07/28]
People v. Wong
Defendant's conviction for multiple crimes, including embezzlement, while working as the Southern California Director of Community and Government Relations of Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, and other crimes while as a Commissioner of the Los Angeles World Airports, is affirmed where: 1) substantial evidence supports the jury's finding that the embezzlement charges were timely; 2) there was sufficient evidence to support his bribery conviction; 3) sufficient evidence supports his conflict of interest convictions; and 4) defendant's conviction for perjury is affirmed as the offense was complete once he signed the 2003 Form 700 and filed it.
[07/21]
US v. Dokich
In a prosecution of defendant for mail fraud and illegal structuring transactions, arising from a fraudulent scheme to sell stock in a company that claimed to be developing diagnostic tests for HIV, mad-cow disease, and blood glucose levels, district court's imposition of a 84-month sentence and an order of restitution in the amount of $55,971,122 is affirmed as, while there were problems in the calculations of loss, defendant has not identified any error that resulted in the sort of miscarriage of justice that would require reversal.
[07/20]
US v. Urciuoli
A conviction of the former CEO of a medical center following a second trial for multiple counts of honest services mail fraud and conspiracy to commit such fraud is affirmed where: 1) the evidence was sufficient to prove the crimes charged; 2) a claim that the jury should have been instructed on the Rhode Island state law "class exception" is rejected as such an instruction was unnecessary to the presentation of his good faith defense, and such instruction could have easily misled the jury; 3) defendant forfeited claims that four other requested instructions on state law should have been given; and 4) defendant's claim, that facilitation of the insurance company meetings was not a misuse of his official powers and so was a legally insufficient basis for conviction, failed in his previous appeal and failed again, despite the Supreme Court's ruling in Skilling.
[07/14]
US v. Lay
Conviction of defendant for investment adviser fraud and multiple mail and wire fraud, related to a hedge fund investment by the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, is affirmed as, because a hedge fund investor can in some circumstances have a fiduciary relationship with an investor, the jury instructions were correct and sufficient evidence supports defendant's conviction. Furthermore, defendant's challenges to the district court's evidentiary rulings and its orders of restitution of $212 million and forfeiture of $590,526.23 are rejected.
[07/07]
US v. Castello
A revised forfeiture order against defendant based on his conviction for failing to file Currency Transaction Reports in the course of running his check-cashing business is vacated where the application of the four Bajakajian factors established that the forfeiture imposed in the district court's initial forfeiture order was not grossly disproportional to the crime for which defendant was convicted.
[07/06]
US v. Perez
Conviction of defendant for filing false federal income tax returns and sentence to 33 months' imprisonment are affirmed where: 1) the district court did not violate defendant's right to be present at trial by conducting a jury instruction conference in his absence because such a conference concerns questions of law which is exempt from Fed. Rule of Crim. Proc. 43; 2) defendant waived any challenge to the district court's failure to provide a jury instruction on the government's net worth and expenditure method of proof; 3) defendant waived any challenge to the district court's limitation on his expert witness's testimony; and 4) the evidence was more than sufficient to support jury finding that defendant willfully filed false income tax returns in violation of section 7206(1).
[07/01]
US v. Kaiser
Defendant's securities fraud conviction is vacated where the district court erred in its instruction with respect to the conscious avoidance theory and in admitting the statement of defendant's corporation's general counsel.
Back to Main
