Court filing
Jury Instructions (Given) — USA v. Ayvazyan et al. (Dkt. 609, C.D. Cal.)
Filed June 25, 2021 in USA v. Ayvazyan et al.; one of 233 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2021-06-25 |
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California · No. 2:20-cr-00579-SVW · Doc. 609 · 2021-06-25 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
RICHARD AYVAZYAN, et al.
Defendants.
CASE NO. 2:20-cr-579-SVW
JURY INSTRUCTIONS
Court’s Instruction No. 1 [Duties of Jury to Find Facts and Follow Law]
Members of the jury, now that you have heard all the evidence, it is my duty
to instruct you on the law that applies to this case. A copy of these instructions will
be available in the jury room for you to consult.
It is your duty to weigh and to evaluate all the evidence received in the case
and, in that process, to decide the facts. It is also your duty to apply the law as I
give it to you to the facts as you find them, whether you agree with the law or not.
You must decide the case solely on the evidence and the law. You should not be
influenced by any person’s race, color, religious beliefs, national ancestry, sexual
orientation, gender identity, gender, or economic circumstances. Also, do not allow
yourself to be influenced by personal likes or dislikes, sympathy, prejudice, fear,
public opinion, or biases, including unconscious biases. Unconscious biases are
June 25, 2021
PMC
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 1 of 49 Page ID
#:7328
FILED
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BY: ___________________ DEPUTY
2
stereotypes, attitudes, or preferences that people may consciously reject but may be
expressed without conscious awareness, control, or intention. You will recall that
you took an oath promising to do so at the beginning of the case.
You must follow all these instructions and not single out some and ignore
others; they are all important. Please do not read into these instructions or into
anything I may have said or done any suggestion as to what verdict you should
return—that is a matter entirely up to you.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 2 of 49 Page ID
#:7329
3
Court’s Instruction No. 2
[Charge Against Defendant Not Evidence—Presumption of Innocence—
Burden of Proof]
The indictment is not evidence. The defendants have pleaded not guilty to
the charges. The defendants are presumed to be innocent unless and until the
government proves the defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition,
the defendants do not have to testify or present any evidence. The defendants do
not have to prove innocence; the government has the burden of proving every
element of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 3 of 49 Page ID
#:7330
4
Court’s Instruction No. 3 [Reasonable Doubt—Defined]
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced
the defendant is guilty.
It is not required that the government prove guilt beyond all possible doubt.
A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense and is not
based purely on speculation. It may arise from a careful and impartial
consideration of all the evidence, or from lack of evidence.
If after a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are not
convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it is your duty to
find the defendant not guilty. On the other hand, if after a careful and impartial
consideration of all the evidence, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant is guilty, it is your duty to find the defendant guilty.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 4 of 49 Page ID
#:7331
5
Court’s Instruction No. 4 [What Is Evidence]
The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are consists of:
(1) the sworn testimony of any witness; and
(2) the exhibits received in evidence; and
(3) any facts to which the parties have agreed.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 5 of 49 Page ID
#:7332
6
Court’s Instruction No. 5 [What Is Not Evidence]
In reaching your verdict you may consider only the testimony and exhibits
received in evidence. The following things are not evidence and you may not
consider them in deciding what the facts are:
1. Questions, statements, objections, and arguments by the lawyers are not
evidence. The lawyers are not witnesses. Although you must consider a
lawyer’s questions to understand the answers of a witness, the lawyer’s
questions are not evidence. Similarly, what the lawyers have said in their
opening statements, will say in their closing arguments, and at other times is
intended to help you interpret the evidence, but it is not evidence. If the facts
as you remember them differ from the way the lawyers state them,
your memory of them controls.
2. Any testimony that I have excluded, stricken, or instructed you to
disregard is not evidence. In addition, some evidence was received only for a
limited purpose; when I have instructed you to consider certain evidence in a
limited way, you must do so.
3. Anything you may have seen or heard when the court was not in session is
not evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received at
the trial.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 6 of 49 Page ID
#:7333
7
Court’s Instruction No. 6 [Direct and Circumstantial Evidence]
Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a
fact, such as testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or
heard or did. Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence, that is, it is proof of one
or more facts from which you can find another fact.
You are to consider both direct and circumstantial evidence. Either can be
used to prove any fact. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be
given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide how much
weight to give to any evidence.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 7 of 49 Page ID
#:7334
8
Court’s Instruction No. 7 [Defendant’s Decision Not to Testify]
A defendant in a criminal case has a constitutional right not to testify. In
arriving at your verdict, the law prohibits you from considering in any manner that
the defendant did not testify.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 8 of 49 Page ID
#:7335
9
Court’s Instruction No. 8 [Defendant’s Decision to Testify]
A defendant has testified. You should treat this testimony just as you would
the testimony of any other witness.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 9 of 49 Page ID
#:7336
10
Court’s Instruction No. 9 [Credibility of Witnesses]
In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to
believe and which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness
says, or part of it, or none of it.
In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:
(1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the
things testified to;
(2) the witness’s memory;
(3) the witness’s manner while testifying;
(4) the witness’s interest in the outcome of the case, if any;
(5) the witness’s bias or prejudice, if any;
(6) whether other evidence contradicted the witness’s testimony;
(7) the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the evidence;
and
(8) any other factors that bear on believability.
Sometimes a witness may say something that is not consistent with
something else he or she said. Sometimes different witnesses will give different
versions of what happened. People often forget things or make mistakes in what
they remember. Also, two people may see the same event but remember it
differently. You may consider these differences, but do not decide
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 10 of 49 Page ID
#:7337
11
that testimony is untrue just because it differs from other testimony.
However, if you decide that a witness has deliberately testified untruthfully
about something important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness
said. On the other hand, if you think the witness testified untruthfully about some
things but told the truth about others, you may accept the part you think is true and
ignore the rest.
The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the
number of witnesses who testify. What is important is how believable the
witnesses were, and how much weight you think their testimony deserves.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 11 of 49 Page ID
#:7338
12
Court’s Instruction No. 10 [Impeachment Evidence—Witness]
You have heard evidence that Anthony Farrar, a witness, had a prior
criminal conviction. You may consider this evidence in deciding whether or not to
believe this witness and how much weight to give to the testimony of this witness.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 12 of 49 Page ID
#:7339
13
Court’s Instruction No. 11 [Activities Not Charged]
You are here only to determine whether the defendants are guilty or not
guilty of the charges in the indictment. The defendants are not on trial for any
conduct or offense not charged in the indictment.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 13 of 49 Page ID
#:7340
14
Court’s Instruction No. 12
[Separate Consideration of Multiple Counts—Multiple Defendants]
A separate crime is charged against one or more of the defendants in each
count. The charges have been joined for trial. You must decide the case of each
defendant on each crime charged against that defendant separately. Your verdict on
any count as to any defendant should not control your verdict on any other count or
as to any other defendant.
All the instructions apply to each defendant and to each count unless a
specific instruction states that it applies only to a specific defendant or count.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 14 of 49 Page ID
#:7341
15
Court’s Instruction No. 13 [Stipulated Facts]
The parties have agreed to certain facts that have been stated to you. Those
facts are now conclusively established.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 15 of 49 Page ID
#:7342
16
Court’s Instruction No. 14 [Transcript of Recording in Foreign Language]
You have heard a recording in the Armenian language. Each of you were
shown a transcript of the recording that has been admitted into evidence. The
transcript is an English-language translation of the recording.
Although some of you may know the Armenian language, it is important that
all jurors consider the same evidence. The transcript is the evidence, not the
foreign language spoken in the recording.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 16 of 49 Page ID
#:7343
17
Court’s Instruction No. 15 [Calls from Jail]
You have heard that defendant Marietta Terabelian made phone calls from
jail. You must not consider the fact that she was in jail as evidence of her guilt of
the crimes charged in this case.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 17 of 49 Page ID
#:7344
18
Court’s Instruction No. 16 [Evidence of Release Under Bail Reform Act]
You have heard evidence that defendant Richard Ayvazyan was released
under the Bail Reform Act. You may consider this evidence only for its bearing, if
any, on the question of whether defendant Richard Ayvazyan was released under
that Act during the commission of the offenses charged in Counts Twenty-Eight
through Thirty-Two. You may not consider defendant Richard Ayvazyan’s bail
status as evidence of guilt of the crimes for which he is now on trial.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 18 of 49 Page ID
#:7345
19
Court’s Instruction No. 17 [Other Co-Defendants]
You have heard that other co-defendants were charged in this case, and you
should not speculate about the reasons why co-defendants were not part of the trial.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 19 of 49 Page ID
#:7346
20
Court’s Instruction No. 18 [“On or About” Defined]
The indictment charges that some of the offenses alleged were committed
“on or about” or “in or around” certain dates.
Although it is necessary for the government to prove beyond a reasonable
doubt that the specified offense was committed on a date reasonably near the date
alleged in the specified count, it is not necessary for the government to prove that
the specified offense was committed precisely on the date charged.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 20 of 49 Page ID
#:7347
21
Court’s Instruction No. 19 [Charts and Summaries]
Certain charts and summaries have been admitted into evidence. Charts and
summaries are only as good as the underlying supporting material. You should,
therefore, give them only such weight as you think the underlying material
deserves.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 21 of 49 Page ID
#:7348
22
Court’s Instruction No. 20
[Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud & Bank Fraud]
The defendants are charged in Count 1 of the indictment with conspiring to
commit wire fraud, in violation of Section 1343 of Title 18 of the United States
Code, and bank fraud, in violation of Section 1344 of Title 18 of the United States
Code. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government
must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, beginning by at least in or about March 2020, and continuing to at
least August 2020, there was an agreement between two or more persons to
commit at least one crime as charged in the indictment; and
Second, the defendant became a member of the conspiracy knowing of at
least one of its objects and intending to help accomplish it.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 22 of 49 Page ID
#:7349
23
Court’s Instruction No. 21 [Conspiracy Generally]
A conspiracy is a kind of criminal partnership—an agreement of two or
more persons to commit one or more crimes. The crime of conspiracy is the
agreement to do something unlawful; it does not matter whether the crime agreed
upon was committed.
For a conspiracy to have existed, it is not necessary that the conspirators
made a formal agreement or that they agreed on every detail of the conspiracy. It
is not enough, however, that they simply met, discussed matters of common
interest, acted in similar ways, or perhaps helped one another. You must find that
there was a plan to commit at least one of the crimes alleged in the indictment as
an object of the conspiracy with all of you agreeing as to the particular crime
which the conspirators agreed to commit.
One becomes a member of a conspiracy by willfully participating in the
unlawful plan with the intent to advance or further some object or purpose of
the conspiracy, even though the person does not have full knowledge of all the
details of the conspiracy. Furthermore, one who willfully joins an existing
conspiracy is as responsible for it as the originators. On the other hand, one who
has no knowledge of a conspiracy, but happens to act in a way which furthers some
object or purpose of the conspiracy, does not thereby become a conspirator.
Similarly, a person does not become a conspirator merely by associating with one
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 23 of 49 Page ID
#:7350
24
or more persons who are conspirators, nor merely by knowing that
a conspiracy exists.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 24 of 49 Page ID
#:7351
25
Court’s Instruction No. 22
[Knowledge of and Association with Other Conspirators]
A conspiracy may continue for a long period of time and may include the
performance of many transactions. It is not necessary that all members of the
conspiracy join it at the same time, and one may become a member of a conspiracy
without full knowledge of all the details of the unlawful scheme or the names,
identities, or locations of all of the other members.
Even though a defendant did not directly conspire with the other
conspirators in the overall scheme, the defendant has, in effect, agreed to
participate in the conspiracy if the government proves each of the following
beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that the defendant directly conspired with one or more conspirators to
carry out at least one of the objects of the conspiracy;
Second, that the defendant knew or had reason to know that other
conspirators were involved with those with whom the defendant directly conspired;
and
Third, that the defendant had reason to believe that whatever benefits the
defendant might get from the conspiracy were probably dependent upon the
success of the entire venture.
It is not a defense that a person's participation in a conspiracy was minor or
for a short period of time.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 25 of 49 Page ID
#:7352
26
Court’s Instruction No. 23
[Liability for Offense Committed by Co-Conspirator]
Each member of a conspiracy is responsible for the actions of the other
conspirators performed during the course of and in furtherance of the conspiracy. If
one member of a conspiracy commits a crime in furtherance of a conspiracy, the
other members have also, under the law, committed the crime.
Therefore, you may find a defendant guilty of a crime charged in the
indictment if the government has proved each of the following elements beyond a
reasonable doubt:
First, someone committed the crime;
Second, that person was a member of a conspiracy charged in the
indictment;
Third, that person performed the crime in furtherance of that conspiracy;
Fourth, that person and the defendant were members of that same
conspiracy at the time that the crime was committed; and
Fifth, the crime fell within the scope of that conspiracy and could
reasonably have been foreseen, by the defendant, to be a necessary or natural
consequence of that conspiracy.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 26 of 49 Page ID
#:7353
27
Court’s Instruction No. 24 [Wire Fraud]
The defendants are charged in Counts Two through Twelve of the
indictment with wire fraud, in violation of Section 1343 of Title 18 of the United
States Code, as follows:
COUNT
DATE
INTERSTATE WIRE
TRANSMISSION
DEFENDANTS
CHARGED
Two
May 1, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$182,637 in PPP loan
proceeds from WebBank,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into S.
Construction JPMorgan
Chase, N.A. Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Three
May 5, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$124,000 in PPP loan
proceeds from Cross River
Bank, sent by means of an
interstate wire, into Allstate
Towing U.S. Bank
Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Four
May 8, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$130,000 in PPP loan
proceeds from Celtic Bank,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into TQC
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Five
May 11, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$137,500 in PPP loan
proceeds from Comerica
Bank, sent by means of an
interstate wire, into
Secureline Realty
Comerica Bank Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 27 of 49 Page ID
#:7354
28
Six
May 11, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$130,187 in PPP loan
proceeds from Celtic Bank,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into Redline
Auto Collision JPMorgan
Chase, N.A. Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Seven
May 20, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$157,500 in PPP loan
proceeds from Celtic Bank,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into Voyage
Limo Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A. Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Eight
June 16, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$149,900 in EIDL loan
proceeds from the SBA,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into G&A
Diamonds U.S. Bank
Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Nine
June 17, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$150,000 in EIDL loan
proceeds from the Redline
Auto Collision JPMorgan
Chase, N.A. Account, sent
by means of an interstate
wire, to Terabelian Bank of
America, N.A. Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Ten
June 22, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$149,900 in EIDL loan
proceeds from the SBA,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into
Timeline Transport Radius
Bank (a/k/a LendingClub
Bank) Account
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Eleven
July 31, 2020
Transfer of approximately
$384,150 in PPP loan
proceeds from Newtek
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 28 of 49 Page ID
#:7355
29
Small Business Finance,
sent by means of an
interstate wire, into Mod
Interiors Radius Bank
Account
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Twelve
August 13, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Newtek
Small Business Finance in
the name of Anna
Dzukaeva, sent by means
of an interstate wire
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
In order for a defendant to be found guilty of wire fraud, in violation of
Section 1343 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the government must prove
each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, the defendant knowingly participated in or devised a scheme or plan
to defraud, or a scheme or plan for obtaining money or property by means of false
or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
Second, the statements made or facts omitted as part of the scheme were
material; that is, they had a natural tendency to influence, or were capable of
influencing, a person to part with money or property;
Third, the defendant acted with the intent to defraud, that is, the intent to
deceive and cheat; and
Fourth, the defendant used, or caused to be used, an interstate wire
communication to carry out or attempt to carry out an essential part of the scheme.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 29 of 49 Page ID
#:7356
30
In determining whether a scheme to defraud exists, you may consider not
only the defendant’s words and statements, but also the circumstances in which
they are used as a whole.
A wiring is caused when one knows that a wire will be used in the ordinary
course of business or when one can reasonably foresee such use.
It need not have been reasonably foreseeable to the defendant that the wire
communication would be interstate in nature. Rather, it must have been reasonably
foreseeable to the defendant that some wire communication would occur in
furtherance of the scheme, and an interstate wire communication must have
actually occurred in furtherance of the scheme.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 30 of 49 Page ID
#:7357
31
Court’s Instruction No. 25 [Bank Fraud]
The defendants are charged in Counts Thirteen through Twenty of the
indictment with bank fraud, in violation of Section 1344(2) of Title 18 of the
United States Code, as follows:
COUNT
DATE
ACT
DEFENDANTS
CHARGED
Thirteen
April 18, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to WebBank
in the name of H.
Construction
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Fourteen
April 30, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Celtic
Bank in the name of TQC
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Fifteen
May 2, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Cross
River Bank in the name of
Allstate Towing
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Sixteen
May 7, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Celtic
Bank in the name of
Redline Auto Collision
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Seventeen
May 9, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Comerica
Bank in the name of
Secureline Realty
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN
Eighteen
May 18, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Celtic
Bank in the name of
Voyage Limo
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Nineteen
June 25, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Celtic
Bank in the name of
Redline Auto Mechanics
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
Twenty
July 13, 2020
Submission of application
for PPP loan to Seattle
R. AYVAZYAN;
M. TERABELIAN;
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 31 of 49 Page ID
#:7358
32
Bank in the name of
Runyan Tax Service
A. AYVAZYAN;
VAHE DADYAN
In order for a defendant to be found guilty of bank fraud, in violation of
Section 1344(2) of Title 18 of the United States Code, the government must prove
each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt for each count:
First, the defendant knowingly carried out a scheme or plan to obtain money
or property from the financial institution specified in the Count by making false
statements or promises;
Second, the defendant knew that the statements or promises were false;
Third, the statements or promises were material; that is, they had a natural
tendency to influence, or were capable of influencing, a financial institution to part
with money or property;
Fourth, the defendant acted with the intent to defraud; and
Fifth, the specified financial institution was federally insured.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 32 of 49 Page ID
#:7359
33
Court’s Instruction No. 26 [Aiding and Abetting]
The following instruction only applies to Counts 2 through 12, for wire fraud
and Counts 13 through 20, for bank fraud. You must not apply this instruction to
any other counts.
A defendant may also be found guilty of a crime even if the defendant
personally did not commit the act or acts constituting the crime but aided and
abetted in its commission. To “aid and abet” means intentionally to help someone
else commit a crime. To prove a defendant guilty of committing a particular crime
by means of aiding and abetting, the government must prove each of the following
beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, a crime was committed by someone;
Second, the defendant aided, counseled, commanded, induced, or procured
that person with respect to at least one element of the crime;
Third, the defendant acted with the intent to facilitate the crime; and
Fourth, the defendant acted before the crime was completed.
It is not enough that the defendant merely associated with the person
committing the crime, or unknowingly or unintentionally did things that were
helpful to that person, or was present at the scene of the crime. The evidence must
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 33 of 49 Page ID
#:7360
34
show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted with the knowledge and
intention of helping that person commit the crime.
A defendant acts with the intent to facilitate the crime when the defendant
actively participates in a criminal venture with advance knowledge of the crime.
The government is not required to prove precisely which defendant actually
committed the crime and which defendant aided and abetted.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 34 of 49 Page ID
#:7361
35
Court’s Instruction No. 27 [Conspiracy: Concealment/Money Laundering]
All of the defendants are charged in Count Twenty-Six of the indictment
with conspiring to engage in money laundering, in violation of Section 1956(h) of
Title 18 of the United States Code. In order for a defendant to be found guilty of
that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a
reasonable doubt:
First, beginning no later than in or around March 2020 and continuing until
at least in or around October 2020, there was an agreement between two or more
persons to commit at least one of the following crimes: (1) money laundering, in
violation of Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) of Title 18 of the United States Code (as
explained in instruction No. 28); and (2) engaging in monetary transactions in
property derived from specified unlawful activity, in violation of Section 1957 of
Title 18 of the United States Code (as explained in instruction No. 29)-- with all of
you agreeing as to the particular crime which the conspirators agreed to commit;
and
Second, the defendant became a member of the conspiracy knowing of at
least one of its objects and intending to help accomplish it.
In considering the charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering, you
must consider the general conspiracy instructions that the Court provided to you
earlier. Those are instruction numbers 21 through 22.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 35 of 49 Page ID
#:7362
36
Court’s Instruction No. 28 [Money Laundering (Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i))]
The crime of money laundering under Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) of Title 18 of
the United States Code, consists of the following elements, which the government
must prove beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, the defendant conducted a financial transaction involving property
that represented the proceeds of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud,
in violation of Section 1349 of Title 18 of the United States Code; wire fraud in
violation of Section 1343 of Title 18 of the United States Code; or bank fraud, in
violation of Section 1344(2) of Title 18 of the United States Code;
Second, the defendant knew that the property represented the proceeds of
some form of unlawful activity;
Third, the defendant knew that the transaction was designed in whole or in
part to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, and/or control
of such proceeds.
A financial transaction is a transaction involving the use of a financial
institution that is engaged in, or the activities of which affect interstate or foreign
commerce in any way.
The phrase “knew that the property represented the proceeds of some form
of unlawful activity” means that the defendant knew that the property involved in
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 36 of 49 Page ID
#:7363
37
the transaction represented proceeds from some form, though not necessarily
which form, of activity that constitutes a felony. I instruct you that conspiracy to
commit wire fraud and bank fraud, wire fraud, and bank fraud are each a felony.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 37 of 49 Page ID
#:7364
38
Court’s Instruction No. 29 [Engaging in Monetary Transactions in Property
Derived from Specified Unlawful Activity (Section 1957)]
The crime of engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from
specified unlawful activity under Section 1957 of Title 18 of the United States
Code consists of the following elements, which the government must prove beyond
a reasonable doubt:
First, the defendant knowingly engaged in a monetary transaction;
Second, the defendant knew that the transaction involved criminally derived
property;
Third, the property had a value greater than $10,000;
Fourth, the property was, in fact, derived from conspiracy to commit bank
fraud and wire fraud, in violation of Section 1349 of Title 18 of the United States
Code; wire fraud, in violation of Section 1343 of Title 18 of the United States
Code; or bank fraud, in violation of Section 1344(2) of Title 18 of the United
States Code; and
Fifth, the transaction occurred in the United States.
The term “monetary transaction” means the deposit, withdrawal, transfer, or
exchange, in or affecting interstate commerce, of funds or a monetary instrument
by, through, or to a financial institution.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 38 of 49 Page ID
#:7365
39
Court’s Instruction No. 30 [Counts Twenty-Seven through Thirty-Two]
Defendant Vahe Dadyan is charged in Count Twenty-Seven, and defendant
Richard Ayvazyan is charged in Counts Twenty-Eight through Thirty-Two, with
laundering money, in violation of Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) of Title 18 of the
United States Code.
Instruction number 28 explains the elements of laundering money in
violation of Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) of Title 18 of the United States Code.
For each of Counts Twenty-Seven through Thirty-Two, you must find
beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant charged in those counts committed
each of the three elements described in instruction number 28.
In considering the charges in Counts Twenty-Seven through Thirty-Two,
you must be careful to refer to the elements in instruction number 28, and not
instruction number 29.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 39 of 49 Page ID
#:7366
40
Court’s Instruction No. 31 [Bail Reform Act Findings]
Defendant Richard Ayvazyan is charged with committing the offenses
charged in Counts Twenty-Eight through Thirty-Two while released pursuant to
the Bail Reform Act. If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant Richard
Ayvazyan committed any of these offenses, you must also determine whether the
government has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the offense
while on release.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 40 of 49 Page ID
#:7367
41
Court’s Instruction No. 32 [Aggravated Identity Theft]
Defendant Richard Ayvazyan is charged in Counts Twenty-One and
Twenty-Two of the indictment with aggravated identity theft in violation of
Section 1028A of Title 18 of the United States Code. Defendant Marietta
Terabelian is charged with this offense in Count Twenty-Two, and defendant Artur
Ayvazyan is charged with this offense in Count Twenty-Four.
In order for a defendant to be found guilty of aggravated identity theft as
charged in these counts, the government must prove each of the following elements
beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, the defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used without legal
authority a means of identification of another person, namely, the following:
For Count Twenty-One, the name of Mark Zindroski;
For Count Twenty-Two, the name and California driver’s license
number of Nazar Terabelian; and
For Count Twenty-Four, the name and date of birth of Anna
Dzukaeva.
Second, the defendant knew that the means of identification belonged to a
real person; and
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 41 of 49 Page ID
#:7368
42
Third, the defendant did so during and in relation to a specific bank fraud or
wire fraud offense charged in the indictment, namely, the following:
For Count Twenty-One, bank fraud, as charged in Count Fourteen;
For Count Twenty-Two, wire fraud, as charged in Count Eleven;
and
For Count Twenty-Four, wire fraud, as charged in Count Twelve.
The government need not establish that the means of identification of
another person was stolen or used without that person’s consent or permission.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 42 of 49 Page ID
#:7369
43
Court’s Instruction No. 33 [Defining “Possession”]
A person has possession of something if the person knows of its presence
and has physical control of it, or knows of its presence and has the power and
intention to control it.
More than one person can be in possession of something if each knows of its
presence and has the power and intention to control it.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 43 of 49 Page ID
#:7370
44
Court’s Instruction No. 34 [Duty to Deliberate]
When you begin your deliberations, elect one member of the jury as your
foreperson who will preside over the deliberations and speak for you here in court.
You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement if
you can do so. Your verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous.
Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only
after you have considered all the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors,
and listened to the views of your fellow jurors.
Do not be afraid to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that
you should. But do not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is
right.
It is important that you attempt to reach a unanimous verdict but, of course,
only if each of you can do so after having made your own conscientious decision.
Do not change an honest belief about the weight and effect of the evidence simply
to reach a verdict.
Perform these duties fairly and impartially. You should not be influenced by
any person’s race, color, religious beliefs, national ancestry, sexual orientation,
gender identity, gender, or economic circumstances. Also, do not allow yourself to
be influenced by personal likes or dislikes, sympathy, prejudice, fear, public
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 44 of 49 Page ID
#:7371
45
opinion, or biases, including unconscious biases. Unconscious biases are
stereotypes, attitudes, or preferences that people may consciously reject but may be
expressed without conscious awareness, control, or intention.
It is your duty as jurors to consult with one another and to deliberate with
one another with a view towards reaching an agreement if you can do so. During
your deliberations, you should not hesitate to reexamine your own views and
change your opinion if you become persuaded that it is wrong.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 45 of 49 Page ID
#:7372
46
Court’s Instruction No. 35 [Use of Notes]
Some of you have taken notes during the trial. Whether or not you took
notes, you should rely on your own memory of what was said. Notes are only to
assist your memory. You should not be overly influenced by your notes or those of
your fellow jurors.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 46 of 49 Page ID
#:7373
47
Court’s Instruction No. 36 [Consideration of Punishment]
The punishment provided by law for this crime is for the court to decide.
You may not consider punishment in deciding whether the government has proved
its case against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 47 of 49 Page ID
#:7374
48
Court’s Instruction No. 37 [Verdict Form]
A verdict form has been prepared for you. After you have reached
unanimous agreement on a verdict, your foreperson should complete the verdict
form according to your deliberations, sign and date it, and advise the bailiff that
you are ready to return to the courtroom.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 48 of 49 Page ID
#:7375
49
Court’s Instruction No. 38 [Communication With Court]
If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me,
you may send a note through the bailiff, signed by any one or more of you. No
member of the jury should ever attempt to communicate with me except by a
signed writing, and I will respond to the jury concerning the case only in writing or
here in open court. If you send out a question, I will consult with the lawyers
before answering it, which may take some time. You may continue your
deliberations while waiting for the answer to any question. Remember that you are
not to tell anyone—including me—how the jury stands, numerically or otherwise,
on any question submitted to you, including the question of the guilt of the
defendant, until after you have reached a unanimous verdict or have been
discharged.
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW Document 609 Filed 06/25/21 Page 49 of 49 Page ID
#:7376File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cacd.802533.609.0.pdf
- Size
- 236,478 bytes
- SHA-256
- 9f69c73d77256888f84b7a396a98f918c074a906b5a6e5746465403a510f834d
- Original
- PACER (login required)