Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings USA v. Torjagbo United States v. Carl Delano Torjagbo — N.D. Ga., No. 1:22-cr-171-MLB Exhibit 1: Initial instructions — USA v. Torjagbo (Dkt. 227.1)

Court filing

Exhibit 1: Initial instructions — USA v. Torjagbo (Dkt. 227.1)

Filed July 25, 2025 in USA v. Torjagbo; one of 189 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Filed2025-07-25

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia · No. 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC · Doc. 227-1 · 2025-07-25 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

COURT’S 
EXHIBIT 1 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 1 of 51

1 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 
ATLANTA DIVISION 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
v. 
CARL DELANO TORJAGBO 
CRIMINAL ACTION NUMBER 
1:22-CR-171-MLB-RDC 
PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS 
Pursuant to this Court’s Order Setting Trial [Doc. 176], the parties hereby 
submit their proposed jury instructions. The instructions agreed upon by the 
parties appear first and are highlighted in green. The instructions where one 
party objects are highlighted in red and provide the basis for objection. Where an 
instruction depends on the trial evidence, it is so noted. 
The parties reserve their right to object to the applicability of an instruction 
based on the evidence submitted at trial. 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 2 of 51

2 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
/s/ Kelly K. Connors 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Georgia Bar No. 504787 
Kelly.Connors@usdoj.gov 
/s/ Nicholas L. Evert 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Georgia Bar No. 693062 
Nicholas.Evert@usdoj.gov 
600 U.S. Courthouse 
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW 
Atlanta, GA 30303 
(404) 581-6000 
DEFENDANT CARL TORJAGBO 
/s / L. Burton Finlayson 
Attorney for Defendant 
Georgia Bar No. 261460 
lbfcourts@aol.com 
Law Office of L. Burton Finlayson 
685 Linwood Avenue, NE 
Suite 200A 
Atlanta, Georgia 30306 
(404) 872-0560 
 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 3 of 51

3 
 
Request to Charge No. 1
Preliminary Instructions—Criminal Cases 
Members of the Jury: 
Now that you have been sworn, I need to explain some basic principles 
about a criminal trial and your duty as jurors. These are preliminary instructions. 
At the end of the trial, I will give you more detailed instructions. 
Duty of jury: 
It will be your duty to decide what happened so you can determine 
whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the crime charged in the 
indictment. At the end of the trial, I will explain the law that you must follow to 
reach your verdict. You must follow the law as I explain it to you even if you do 
not agree with the law. 
What is evidence: 
You must decide the case solely on the evidence presented here in the 
courtroom. Evidence can come in many forms. It can be testimony about what 
someone saw or heard or smelled. It can be an exhibit admitted into evidence. It 
can be someone’s opinion. Some evidence proves a fact indirectly, such as a 
witness who saw wet grass outside and people walking into the courthouse 
carrying wet umbrellas. Indirect evidence, sometimes called circumstantial 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 4 of 51

4 
 
evidence, is simply a chain of circumstances that proves a fact. As far as the law 
is concerned, it makes no difference whether evidence is direct or indirect. You 
may choose to believe or disbelieve either kind and should give every piece of 
evidence whatever weight you think it deserves. 
What is not evidence: 
Certain things are not evidence and must not be considered. I will list them 
for you now: 
• Statements and arguments of the lawyers. In their opening statements 
and closing arguments, the lawyers will discuss the case, but their 
remarks are not evidence. 
• Questions and objections of the lawyers. The lawyers’ questions are not 
evidence. Only the witnesses’ answers are evidence. You should not 
think that something is true just because a lawyer’s question suggests 
that it is. For instance, if a lawyer asks a witness, “you saw the 
defendant hit his sister, didn’t you?”—that question is no evidence 
whatsoever of what the witness saw or what the defendant did, unless 
the witness agrees with it. 
There are rules of evidence that control what can be received into 
evidence. When a lawyer asks a question or offers an exhibit and a lawyer on the 
other side thinks that it is not permitted by the rules of evidence, that lawyer 
may object. If I overrule the objection, then the question may be answered or the 
exhibit received. If I sustain the objection, then the question cannot be answered, 
and the exhibit cannot be received. Whenever I sustain an objection to a question, 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 5 of 51

5 
 
you must ignore the question and not try to guess what the answer would have 
been. 
Sometimes I may order that evidence be stricken and that you disregard or 
ignore the evidence. That means that when you are deciding the case, you must 
not consider that evidence. 
Some evidence is admitted only for a limited purpose. When I instruct you 
that an item of evidence has been admitted for a limited purpose, you must 
consider it only for that limited purpose and no other. 
Credibility of witnesses: 
In reaching your verdict, you may have to decide what testimony to 
believe and what 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: 
• the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the 
things testified to; 
• the witness’s memory; 
• the witness’s manner while testifying; 
• the witness’s interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or 
prejudice; 
• whether other evidence contradicted the witness’s testimony; 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 6 of 51

6 
 
• the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the 
evidence; and 
• any other factors that bear on believability. i will give you additional 
guidelines for determining credibility of witnesses at the end of the 
case. 
Rules for criminal cases: 
As you know, this is a criminal case. There are three basic rules about a 
criminal case that you must keep in mind. 
First, the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The 
indictment against the defendant brought by the Government is only an 
accusation, nothing more. It is not proof of guilt or anything else. The defendant 
therefore starts out with a clean slate. 
Second, the burden of proof is on the Government until the very end of the 
case. The defendant has no burden to prove his innocence or to present any 
evidence, or to testify. Since the defendant has the right to remain silent and may 
choose whether to testify, you cannot legally put any weight on a defendant’s 
choice not to testify. It is not evidence. 
Third, the Government must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a 
reasonable doubt. I will give you further instructions on this point later, but bear 
in mind that the level of proof required is high. 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 7 of 51

7 
 
Conduct of the jury: 
Our law requires jurors to follow certain instructions regarding their 
personal conduct in order to help assure a just and fair trial. I will now give you 
those instructions: 
1. 
Do not talk, either among yourselves or with anyone else, 
about anything related to the case. You may tell the people 
with whom you live and your employer that you are a juror 
and give them information about when you will be required 
to be in court, but you may not discuss with them or anyone 
else anything related to the case. 
2. 
Do not, at any time during the trial, request, accept, agree to 
accept, or discuss with any person, any type of payment or 
benefit in return for supplying any information about the trial. 
3. 
You must promptly tell me about any incident you know of 
involving an attempt by any person to improperly influence 
you or any member of the jury. 
4. 
Do not visit or view the premises or place where the charged 
crime was allegedly committed, or any other premises or 
place involved in the case. And you must not use Internet 
maps or Google Earth or any other program or device to 
search for a view of any location discussed in the testimony. 
5. 
Do not read, watch, or listen to any accounts or discussions 
related to the case which may be reported by newspapers, 
television, radio, the Internet, or any other news media. 
6. 
Do not attempt to research any fact, issue, or law related to 
this case, whether by discussions with others, by library or 
Internet research, or by any other means or source. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 8 of 51

8 
 
In this age of instant electronic communication and research, I want to 
emphasize that in addition to not talking face to face with anyone about the case, 
you must not communicate with anyone about the case by any other means, 
including by telephone, text messages, email, Internet chat, chat rooms, blogs, or 
social-networking websites and apps such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, 
YouTube, or Twitter. You may not use any similar technology of social media, 
even if I have not specifically mentioned it here. 
You must not provide any information about the case to anyone by any 
means whatsoever, and that includes posting information about the case, or what 
you are doing in the case, on any device or Internet site, including blogs, chat 
rooms, social websites, or any other means. 
You also must not use Google or otherwise search for any information 
about the case, or the law that applies to the case, or the people involved in the 
case, including the defendant, the witnesses, the lawyers, or the judge. It is 
important that you understand why these rules exist and why they are so 
important: 
Our law does not permit jurors to talk with anyone else about the case, or 
to permit anyone to talk to them about the case, because only jurors are 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 9 of 51

9 
 
authorized to render a verdict. Only you have been found to be fair and only you 
have promised to be fair—no one else is so qualified. 
Our law also does not permit jurors to talk among themselves about the 
case until the court tells them to begin deliberations, because premature 
discussions can lead to a premature final decision. Our law also does not permit 
you to visit a place discussed in the testimony. First, you can’t be sure that the 
place is in the same condition as it was on the day in question. Second, even if it 
were in the same condition, once you go to a place discussed in the testimony to 
evaluate the evidence in light of what you see, you become a witness, not a juror. 
As a witness, you may now have a mistaken view of the scene that neither party 
may have a chance to correct. That is not fair. 
Finally, our law requires that you not read or listen to any news accounts 
of the case, and that you not attempt to research any fact, issue, or law related to 
the case. Your decision must be based solely on the testimony and other evidence 
presented in this courtroom. Also, the law often uses words and phrases in 
special ways, so it’s important that any definitions you hear come only from me, 
and not from any other source. It wouldn’t be fair to the parties for you to base 
your decision on some reporter’s view or opinion, or upon other information you 
acquire outside the courtroom. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 10 of 51

10 
 
These rules are designed to help guarantee a fair trial, and our law 
accordingly sets forth serious consequences if the rules are not followed. I trust 
that you understand and appreciate the importance of following these rules, and 
in accord with your oath and promise, I know you will do so. 
Taking notes: 
Moving on now, if you wish, you may take notes to help you remember 
what witnesses said. If you do take notes, please keep them to yourself until you 
and your fellow jurors go to the jury room to decide the case. Do not let note-
taking distract you so that you do not hear other answers by witnesses. When 
you leave the courtroom, your notes should be left in the jury room. Whether or 
not you take notes, you should rely on your own memory of what was said. 
Notes are to assist your memory only. They are not entitled to any greater weight 
than your memory or impression about the testimony. 
Course of the trial: 
The trial will now begin. First, the Government will make an opening 
statement, which is simply an outline to help you understand the evidence as it 
comes in. Next, the defendant’s attorney may, but does not have to, make an 
opening statement. Opening statements are neither evidence nor argument. The 
Government will then present its witnesses, and counsel for the defendant may 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 11 of 51

11 
 
cross-examine them. Following the Government’s case, the defendant may, if he 
wishes, present witnesses whom the Government may cross-examine. After all 
the evidence is in, the attorneys will present their closing arguments to 
summarize and interpret the evidence for you, and I will instruct you on the law. 
After that, you will go to the jury room to decide your verdict. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases P1 (Apr. 2024 rev.) (as 
modified). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 12 of 51

12 
 
Request to Charge No. 2 
Introduction 
Court’s Instructions to the Jury 
Members of the Jury: 
It’s my duty to instruct you on the rules of law that you must use in 
deciding this case. After I’ve completed these instructions, you will go to the jury 
room and begin your discussions—what we call your deliberations. 
You must decide whether the Government has proved the specific facts 
necessary to find the Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B1 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 13 of 51

13 
 
Request to Charge No. 3 
The Duty to Follow Instructions and the Presumption of Innocence1 
Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented here. You 
must not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against 
the Defendant or the Government.  
You must follow the law as I explain it—even if you do not agree with the 
law—and you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single 
out or disregard any of the Court’s instructions on the law.  
The indictment or formal charge against a defendant isn’t evidence of 
guilt. The law presumes every defendant is innocent. The Defendant does not 
have to prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. The Government 
must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the 
Defendant not guilty. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B2.1 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
1 This instruction is dependent upon the evidence presented at trial. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 14 of 51

14 
 
Request to Charge No. 4 
The Duty to Follow Instructions and the Presumption of Innocence 
When a Defendant Does Not Testify2 
Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented during the 
trial. You must not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice 
against the Defendant or the Government.  
You must follow the law as I explain it—even if you do not agree with the 
law—and you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single 
out or disregard any of the Court’s instructions on the law.  
The indictment or formal charge against a Defendant isn’t evidence of 
guilt. The law presumes every Defendant is innocent. The Defendant does not 
have to prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. A Defendant does 
not have to testify, and you cannot consider in any way the fact that the 
Defendant did not testify. The Government must prove guilt beyond a 
reasonable doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the Defendant not guilty. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B2.2 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
 
2 This instruction is dependent upon the evidence presented at trial. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 15 of 51

15 
 
Request to Charge No. 5 
Definition of “Reasonable Doubt” 
The Government’s burden of proof is heavy, but it doesn’t have to prove a 
Defendant’s guilt beyond all possible doubt. The Government’s proof only has to 
exclude any “reasonable doubt” concerning the Defendant’s guilt.  
A “reasonable doubt” is a real doubt, based on your reason and common 
sense after you’ve carefully and impartially considered all the evidence in the 
case.  
“Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is proof so convincing that you would 
be willing to rely and act on it without hesitation in the most important of your 
own affairs. If you are convinced that the Defendant has been proved guilty 
beyond a reasonable doubt, say so. If you are not convinced, say so. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B3 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 16 of 51

16 
 
Request to Charge No. 6 
Consideration of Direct and Circumstantial Evidence; Argument of Counsel; 
Comments by the Court 
As I said before, you must consider only the evidence that I have admitted 
in the case. Evidence includes the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits 
admitted. But anything the lawyers say is not evidence and isn’t binding on you. 
 You shouldn’t assume from anything I’ve said that I have any opinion 
about any factual issue in this case. Except for my instructions to you on the law, 
you should disregard anything I may have said during the trial in arriving at 
your own decision about the facts.  
Your own recollection and interpretation of the evidence is what matters. 
 In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and common sense to 
make deductions and reach conclusions. You shouldn’t be concerned about 
whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial.  
“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who asserts that he or she 
has actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness.  
“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances 
that tend to prove or disprove a fact. There’s no legal difference in the weight 
you may give to either direct or circumstantial evidence. 
                                  
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 17 of 51

17 
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B4 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 18 of 51

18 
 
Request to Charge No. 7 
Credibility of Witnesses 
When I say you must consider all the evidence, I don’t mean that you must 
accept all the evidence as true or accurate. You should decide whether you 
believe what each witness had to say, and how important that testimony was. In 
making that decision you may believe or disbelieve any witness, in whole or in 
part. The number of witnesses testifying concerning a particular point doesn’t 
necessarily matter.  
To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest that you ask yourself 
a few questions: 
• Did the witness impress you as one who was telling the truth? 
• Did the witness have any particular reason not to tell the truth? 
• Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of the case? 
• Did the witness seem to have a good memory? 
• Did the witness have the opportunity and ability to accurately observe 
the things he or she testified about? 
• Did the witness appear to understand the questions clearly and answer 
them directly? 
• Did the witness’s testimony differ from other testimony or other 
evidence? 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B5 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 19 of 51

19 
 
Request to Charge No. 8 
Impeachment of Witnesses Because of Inconsistent Statements3 
You should also ask yourself whether there was evidence that a witness 
testified falsely about an important fact. And ask whether there was evidence 
that at some other time a witness said or did something, or didn’t say or do 
something, that was different from the testimony the witness gave during this 
trial.  
But keep in mind that a simple mistake doesn’t mean a witness wasn’t 
telling the truth as he or she remembers it. People naturally tend to forget some 
things or remember them inaccurately. So, if a witness misstated something, you 
must decide whether it was because of an innocent lapse in memory or an 
intentional deception. The significance of the misstatement may depend on 
whether the misstatement was about an important fact or about an unimportant 
detail. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B6.1 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
 
3 This instruction is dependent upon the evidence presented at trial. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 20 of 51

20 
 
Request to Charge No. 9 
Impeachment of Witnesses Because of Inconsistent Statements 
(Defendant with No Felony Conviction Testifies)4 
You should also ask yourself whether there was evidence that a witness 
testified falsely about an important fact. And ask whether there was evidence 
that at some other time a witness said or did something, or didn’t say or do 
something, that was different from the testimony the witness gave during this 
trial.  
But keep in mind that a simple mistake doesn’t mean a witness wasn’t 
telling the truth as he or she remembers it. People naturally tend to forget some 
things or remember them inaccurately. So, if a witness misstated something, you 
must decide whether it was because of an innocent lapse in memory or an 
intentional deception. The significance of the misstatement may depend on 
whether the misstatement was about an important fact or about an unimportant 
detail. A defendant has a right not to testify.  
But since the Defendant did testify, you should decide whether you 
believe the Defendant’s testimony in the same way as that of any other witness. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B6.3 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
4 This instruction is dependent upon the evidence presented at trial. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 21 of 51

21 
 
Request to Charge No. 10 
Introduction to Offense Instructions 
The indictment charges eleven separate crimes, called “counts,” against the 
Defendant. Each count has a number. You’ll be given a copy of the indictment to 
refer to during your deliberations.  
Count 1 charges the Defendant with bank fraud. Count 2 charges the 
Defendant with aggravated identity theft. Counts 3 and 4 charge the Defendant 
with wire fraud. Counts 5 through 7 charge the Defendant with concealment 
money laundering, and Counts 8 through 11 charge the Defendant with 
transactional money laundering. I will explain the law governing those 
substantive offenses in a moment. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B8 (Apr. 2024 rev.) (as 
modified). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 22 of 51

22 
 
Request to Charge No. 11 
Conjunctively Charged Counts 
Where a statute specifies multiple alternative ways in which an offense 
may be committed, the indictment may allege the multiple ways in the 
conjunctive, that is, by using the word “and.” If only one of the alternatives is 
proved beyond a reasonable doubt, that is sufficient for conviction, so long as 
you agree unanimously as to that alternative. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B8.1 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 23 of 51

23 
 
Request to Charge No. 12 
Concealment Money Laundering 
18 U.S.C. § 1956 
It’s a Federal crime to knowingly engage in certain kinds of financial 
transactions commonly known as money laundering. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following 
facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) the Defendant knowingly conducted or tried to conduct financial 
transactions; 
 
(2) the Defendant knew that the money or property involved in the 
transaction were the proceeds of some kind of unlawful activity; 
 
(3)  money or property did come from an unlawful activity, 
specifically bank fraud or wire fraud; and 
 
(4) the Defendant knew that the transaction was designed, in whole 
or in part, to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, 
ownership, or the control of the proceeds. 
 
To “conduct a transaction” means to start or finish a transaction, or to 
participate in a transaction at any point. 
A “transaction” means a purchase, sale, loan, promise, gift, transfer, 
delivery, or other disposition of money or property. A transaction with a financial 
institution also includes a deposit, withdrawal, transfer between accounts, 
exchange of currency, loan, extension of credit, use of a safe deposit box, or 
purchase or sale of any stock, bond, certificate of deposit, or other monetary 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 24 of 51

24 
 
instrument. 
A “financial transaction” means – 
• a transaction that in any way or to any degree affects interstate or 
foreign commerce by sending or moving money by wire or other 
means; or 
• a transaction that in any way or to any degree affects interstate or 
foreign commerce by involving one or more “monetary 
instruments.” The phrase “monetary instruments” includes coins 
or currency of any country, travelers or personal checks, bank 
checks or money orders, or investment securities or negotiable 
instruments in a form that allows ownership to transfer on 
delivery; or  
• a transaction that in any way or to any degree affects interstate or 
foreign commerce by involving the transfer of title to any real 
property, vehicle, vessel or aircraft; or 
• a transaction involving the use of a financial institution that is 
involved in interstate or foreign commerce, or whose activities 
affect, interstate or foreign commerce in any way or degree. The 
phrase “financial institution” includes a bank insured by the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). 
“Interstate or foreign commerce” means trade and other business activity 
between people or businesses in at least two states or between people or businesses 
in the United States and people or businesses outside the United States. 
To know “that the money or property involved in the transaction came from 
some kind of unlawful activity” is to know that the money or property came from 
an activity that’s a felony under state, Federal, or foreign law. 
The term “proceeds” means any property derived from or obtained or 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 25 of 51

25 
 
retained, directly or indirectly, through some form of unlawful activity, including 
the gross receipts of the activity. 
The phrase “specified unlawful activity” means bank fraud or wire fraud, 
which I have already explained to you.  
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases O74.2 (Apr. 2024 rev.) 
(as modified). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 26 of 51

26 
 
Request to Charge No. 13 
Transactional Money Laundering 
18 U.S.C. § 1957 
It’s a Federal crime for anyone to engage in certain kinds of financial 
transactions commonly known as money laundering. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this offense only if all the following 
are proved beyond a reasonable doubt; 
(1) the Defendant knowingly engaged or attempted to engage in a 
monetary transaction; 
 
(2) the Defendant knew the transaction involved property or funds 
that were the proceeds of some criminal activity; 
 
(3) the property had a value of more than $10,000; 
 
(4) the property was in fact proceeds of bank fraud or wire fraud; and 
 
(5) the transaction took place in the United States. 
 
The term “monetary transaction” means the deposit, withdrawal, transfer, 
exchange of funds or a monetary instrument by, through, or to a financial 
institution in a way that affects interstate commerce.  
A “financial institution” means a bank insured by the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation (FDIC). 
The term “proceeds” means any property derived from or obtained or 
retained, directly or indirectly, through some form of unlawful activity, including 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 27 of 51

27 
 
the gross receipts of the activity. 
It doesn’t matter whether the Defendant knew the precise nature of the 
crime or that the property came from committing bank fraud or wire fraud. But 
the Government must prove that the Defendant knew that the property involved 
in the monetary transaction was obtained or derived from committing some crime. 
Also it doesn’t matter whether all the property involved was derived from 
a crime. The Government only has to prove that more than5 $10,000 worth of the 
property was obtained or derived from committing a crime. 
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases O74.6 (Apr. 2024 rev.) 
(as modified). 
 
 
 
 
 
5 Language added for consistency with statute, which requires that the property 
have a value of more than $10,000. See 18 U.S.C. § 1957. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 28 of 51

28 
 
Request to Charge No. 14 
Aiding and Abetting; Agency 
18 U.S.C. § 2 
It’s possible to prove the Defendant guilty of a crime even without 
evidence that the Defendant personally performed every act charged. 
Ordinarily, any act a person can do may be done by directing another 
person, or “agent.” Or it may be done by acting with or under the direction of 
others. 
A Defendant “aids and abets” a person if the Defendant intentionally joins 
with the person to commit a crime. 
A Defendant is criminally responsible for the acts of another person if the 
Defendant aids and abets the other person. A Defendant is also responsible if the 
Defendant willfully directs or authorizes the acts of an agent, employee, or other 
associate.  
But finding that a Defendant is criminally responsible for the acts of 
another person requires proof that the Defendant intentionally associated with or 
participated in the crime—not just proof that the Defendant was simply present 
at the scene of a crime or knew about it. 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 29 of 51

29 
 
In other words, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the 
Defendant was a willful participant and not merely a knowing spectator. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases S7 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 30 of 51

30 
 
Request to Charge No. 15 
On or About a Particular Date 
You’ll see that the indictment charges that a crime was committed “on or 
about” a certain date. The Government doesn’t have to prove that the offense 
occurred on an exact date. The Government only has to prove beyond a 
reasonable doubt that the crime was committed on a date reasonably close to the 
date alleged. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B9.2 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 31 of 51

31 
 
Request to Charge No. 16 
Good-Faith Defense6 
“Good faith” is a complete defense to a charge that requires intent to 
defraud. A defendant isn’t required to prove good faith. The Government must 
prove intent to defraud beyond a reasonable doubt. 
An honestly held opinion or an honestly formed belief cannot be fraudulent 
intent – even if the opinion or belief is mistaken. Similarly, evidence of a mistake 
in judgment, an error in management, or carelessness can’t establish fraudulent 
intent. 
But an honest belief that a business venture would ultimately succeed 
doesn’t constitute good faith if the Defendant intended to deceive others by 
making representations the Defendant knew to be false or fraudulent. 
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases S17 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
 
6 The Defendant proposes this instruction. The government notes that this 
instruction should only be given if there is an evidentiary basis for the request. 
As noted in the cover page, the government reserves objection if there is no 
support for the charge at the close of all evidence. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 32 of 51

32 
 
Request to Charge No. 17 
Caution: Punishment 
Single Defendant, Multiple Counts 
Each count of the indictment charges a separate crime. You must consider 
each crime and the evidence relating to it separately. If you find the Defendant 
guilty or not guilty of one crime, that must not affect your verdict for any other 
crime. 
I caution you that the Defendant is on trial only for the specific crimes 
charged in the indictment. You’re here to determine from the evidence in this 
case whether the Defendant is guilty or not guilty of those specific crimes. 
You must never consider punishment in any way to decide whether the 
Defendant is guilty. If you find the Defendant guilty, the punishment is for the 
Judge alone to decide later. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B10.2 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 33 of 51

33 
 
Request to Charge No. 18 
Note-taking 
You’ve been permitted to take notes during the trial. Most of you—
perhaps all of you—have taken advantage of that opportunity. You must use 
your notes only as a memory aid during deliberations. You must not give your 
notes priority over your independent recollection of the evidence. And you must 
not allow yourself to be unduly influenced by the notes of other jurors. I 
emphasize that notes are not entitled to any greater weight than your memories 
or impressions about the testimony. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases S5 (Apr. 2024 rev.).  
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 34 of 51

34 
 
Request to Charge No. 19 
Duty to Deliberate 
Your verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous—in other 
words, you must all agree. Your deliberations are secret, and you’ll never have to 
explain your verdict to anyone. 
Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after fully 
considering the evidence with the other jurors. So you must discuss the case with 
one another and try to reach an agreement. While you’re discussing the case, 
don’t hesitate to reexamine your own opinion and change your mind if you 
become convinced that you were wrong. But don’t give up your honest beliefs 
just because others think differently or because you simply want to get the case 
over with. 
Remember that, in a very real way, you’re judges—judges of the facts. 
Your only interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B11 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 35 of 51

35 
 
Request to Charge No. 20 
Verdict 
When you get to the jury room, choose one of your members to act as 
foreperson. The foreperson will direct your deliberations and will speak for you 
in court. 
A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience. 
[Explain verdict] 
Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you’ve all agreed 
on the verdict, your foreperson must fill in the form, sign it, date it, and carry it. 
Then you’ll return it to the courtroom. 
If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your 
message or question and give it to the marshal. The marshal will bring it to me 
and I’ll respond as promptly as possible—either in writing or by talking to you in 
the courtroom. But I caution you not to tell me how many jurors have voted one 
way or the other at that time. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B12 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 36 of 51

36 
 
Request to Charge No. 21 
Confession or Statement of a Single Defendant 
If the Government offers evidence that a Defendant made a statement or 
admission to someone after being arrested or detained, you must consider that 
evidence with caution and great care. 
You must decide for yourself (1)  whether the Defendant made the 
statement, and (2) if so, how much weight to give to it. To make these decisions, 
you must consider all the evidence about the statement – including the 
circumstances under which it was made. 
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases S2.1 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 37 of 51

37 
 
Request to Charge No. 22 
Explanatory Instruction 
Transcript of Tape Recorded Conversation 
 
Members of the Jury: Exhibit _____ has been identified as a typewritten transcript 
of the oral conversation heard on the tape recording received in evidence as 
Exhibit _____. The transcript also purports to identify the speakers engaged in the 
conversation. 
I’ve admitted the transcript for the limited and secondary purpose of 
helping you follow the content of the conversation as you listen to the tape 
recording and also to help you identify the speakers. 
But you are specifically instructed that whether the transcript correctly 
reflects the content of the conversation or the identity of the speakers is entirely 
for you to decide based on your own evaluation of the testimony you have heard 
about the preparation of the transcript, and from your own examination of the 
transcript in relation to hearing the tape recording itself as the primary evidence 
of its own contents. 
If you determine that the transcript is in any respect incorrect or unreliable, 
you should disregard it to that extent. 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 38 of 51

38 
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases T3 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 39 of 51

39 
 
Request to Charge No. 23 
Knowingly 
The word “knowingly” means that an act was done voluntarily and 
intentionally and not because of a mistake or by accident. 
The word “willfully” means that the act was committed voluntarily and 
purposely, with the intent to do something the law forbids; that is, with the bad 
purpose to disobey or disregard the law. While a person must have acted with 
the intent to do something the law forbids before you can find that the person 
acted “willfully,” the person need not be aware of the specific law or rule that his 
conduct may be violating.7 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases B9.1A (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
 
7 The Defendant proposes this instruction, which includes explanations of both 
“knowingly” and “willfully.” The government objects to inclusion of the 
explanation regarding “willfully.” None of the charged offenses require that the 
Defendant acted “willfully,” as that term is defined in B9.1A. The Court should 
not instruct the jury on this term because it is irrelevant to the charges and 
instructing the jury on an irrelevant term is likely to mislead and confuse the 
jury. The parties agree that the Court should instruct the jury concerning 
“knowingly.” 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 40 of 51

40 
 
Request to Charge No. 24 
Bank Fraud 
18 U.S.C. § 1344 
It’s a Federal crime to carry out or attempt to carry out a scheme to defraud 
a financial institution, or to get money or property owned or controlled by a 
financial institution by using false pretenses, representations, or promises. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following 
facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) the Defendant knowingly carried out or attempted to carry out a 
scheme to defraud a financial institution, or to get money, assets, 
or other property from a financial institution, by using false or 
fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises about a 
material fact; 
(2) the false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises 
were material; 
(3) the Defendant intended to defraud the financial institution; and 
(4) the financial institution was federally insured. 
 
A “scheme to defraud” includes any plan or course of action intended to 
deceive or cheat someone out of money or property by using false or fraudulent 
pretenses, representations, or promises relating to a material fact. 
A statement or representation is “false” or “fraudulent” if it is about a 
material fact that the speaker knows is untrue or makes with reckless indifference 
as to the truth and makes with intent to defraud. A statement or representation 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 41 of 51

41 
 
may be “false” or “fraudulent” when it’s a half truth or effectively conceals a 
material fact and is made with the intent to defraud. 
A “material fact” is an important fact that a reasonable person would use to 
decide whether to do or not do something. A fact is “material” if it has the capacity 
or natural tendency to influence a person’s decision. It doesn’t matter whether the 
decision-maker actually relied on the statement or knew or should have known 
that the statement was false. 
To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly and with the specific 
intent to use false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises to obtain 
money or property. Proving intent to defraud does not require proof that the 
Defendant acted with the intent to cause the victim economic loss.8 
 
 
8 The government proposes this instruction, which amends the explanation of 
“intent to defraud” that appears in the current Pattern Instruction, in response to 
the Supreme Court’s recent holding in Kousisis.  
 
The Pattern Instructions for bank fraud (O52) and wire fraud (O51) both state:  
To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly and  
with the specific intent to use false or fraudulent pretenses,  
representations, or promises to cause loss of injury.  
Proving intent to deceive alone, without the intent to cause  
loss or injury, is not sufficient to prove intent to defraud. 
 
This explanation of “intent to defraud” was added in response to the Eleventh 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 42 of 51

42 
 
The Government doesn’t have to prove all the details alleged in the 
indictment about the precise nature and purpose of the scheme. It also doesn’t 
have to prove that the alleged scheme actually succeeded in defrauding anyone. 
What must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt is that the Defendant knowingly 
attempted or carried out a scheme substantially similar to the one alleged in the 
indictment. 
 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases O52 (Apr. 2024 rev.) 
(as modified). 
 
 
 
 
Circuit’s decision in United States v. Takhalov, 827 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2016), but 
that decision was abrogated by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kousisis 
and is no longer a correct statement of law. The Supreme Court held that a 
defendant commits wire fraud “by scheming to obtain the victim’s money or 
property, regardless of whether he seeks to leave the victim economically worse 
off.” Kousisis v. United States, 605 U.S. _____ (2025). In other words, the 
government does not have to prove that the defendant acted with the intent to 
cause the victim economic loss. Id. Accordingly, both the bank fraud and wire 
fraud instructions must be amended to remove and replace language 
inconsistent with Kousisis.   
 
The Defendant objects to the amended instruction on ex post facto grounds.  
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 43 of 51

43 
 
Request to Charge No. 25 
Aggravated Identity Theft 
18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1) 
It’s a Federal crime to commit aggravated identity theft. 
 
The Defendant can be found guilty of aggravated identity theft only if all 
the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1)  the Defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used 
another person’s means of identification; 
 
(2)  without lawful authority; and 
 
(3)  during and in relation to the bank fraud scheme alleged in 
Count 1. 
 
 
A “means of identification” is any name or number used, alone or together 
with any other information, to identify a specific person, including a name, social 
security number, date of birth, officially issued driver’s license or identification 
number, alien registration number, passport number, employer or taxpayer 
identification number, or electronic identification number or routing code.  It can 
also include a fingerprint, voice print or other biometric data. 
 
The Government must prove that the Defendant knew that the means of 
identification, in fact, belonged to another actual person, living or dead, and not 
a fictitious person. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 44 of 51

44 
 
The Government must prove that the Defendant knowingly transferred, 
possessed, or used another person’s identity “without lawful authority.”  The 
Government does not have to prove that the Defendant stole the means of 
identification.  The Government is required to prove the Defendant transferred, 
possessed, or used the other person’s means of identification for an unlawful or 
illegitimate purpose.   
The Government also must prove that the means of identification was 
possessed “during and in relation to” the crime alleged in the indictment.  The 
phrase “during and in relation to” means that there must be a firm connection 
between the Defendant, the means of identification, and the crime alleged in the 
indictment.  The means of identification must have helped with some important 
function or purpose of the crime, and not simply have been there accidentally 
or coincidentally.  The misuse of another person’s means of identification must 
be at the crux of the bank fraud scheme alleged in Count 1 and not merely an 
ancillary feature.9 
 
 
9 The government proposes this instruction, which removes and replaces 
language in the Pattern Instruction that is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s 
holding in Dubin v. United States, 599 U.S. 110 (2023).  
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 45 of 51

45 
 
 
  Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases O40.3 (Apr. 2024 rev.) 
(as modified). 
 
 
 
 
The Pattern Instruction for aggravated identity theft (O40.3) includes the 
statement, “The means of identification at least must facilitate, or have the 
potential of facilitating, the crime alleged in the indictment.” This sentence is an 
incorrect statement of law. In Dubin, the Supreme Court held that evidence that 
the means of identification facilitated the predicate offense was insufficient to 
prove a conviction for aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 
§ 1028A(a)(1). Dubin v. United States, 599 U.S. 110, 122 (2023). Instead, misuse of 
the means of identification must “be at the crux of the criminality” and not an 
ancillary feature. Id. at 114, 127-32.   
 
While the Defendant agrees that the revised and underlined language is 
appropriate, he proposes also including, “Being ‘at the crux of the criminality’ 
requires more than a causal relationship, such as ‘facilitation’ of the offense or 
being a but-for cause of its ‘success.’” The government objects to including this 
additional language. First, the proposed amendment removes any reference to 
“facilitation” and introduction of this term is unnecessary and confusing. Second, 
this additional sentence provides little guidance to the jury about how to 
evaluate whether the misuse of the means of identification is the crux of the bank 
fraud scheme. If the Court determines that further instruction is needed, then the 
government may propose additional language consistent with Dubin, such as: 
“[W]ith fraud or deceit crimes . . . the means of identification must be used in a 
manner that is fraudulent or deceptive.” Dubin, 599 U.S. at 131-32. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 46 of 51

46 
 
Request to Charge No. 26 
Wire Fraud 
18 U.S.C. § 1343 
It’s a Federal crime to use interstate wire communications to carry out a 
scheme to defraud someone else. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following 
facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) 
the Defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme 
to defraud someone by using false or fraudulent pretenses, 
representations, or promises; 
(2) 
the false pretenses, representations, or promises were about a 
material fact; 
(3) 
the Defendant acted with the intent to defraud; and 
(4) 
the Defendant transmitted or caused to be transmitted by wire 
some communication in interstate commerce to help carry out 
the scheme to defraud. 
A “scheme to defraud” means any plan or course of action intended to 
deceive or cheat someone out of money or property by using false or fraudulent 
pretenses, representations, or promises. 
A statement or representation is “false” or “fraudulent” if it is about a 
material fact that the speaker knows is untrue or makes with reckless 
indifference to the truth, and makes with the intent to defraud. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 47 of 51

47 
 
A statement or representation may be “false” or “fraudulent” when it is a 
half-truth, or effectively conceals a material fact, and is made with the intent to 
defraud. 
A “material fact” is an important fact that a reasonable person would use 
to decide whether to do or not do something. 
A fact is “material” if it has the capacity or natural tendency to influence a 
person’s decision. It doesn’t matter whether the decision-maker actually relied 
on the statement or knew or should have known that the statement was false. 
To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly and with the 
specific intent to use false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises 
to obtain money or property. Proving intent to defraud does not require proof 
that the Defendant acted with the intent to cause the victim economic loss.10 
 
 
10 The government proposes this instruction, which amends the explanation of 
“intent to defraud” that appears in the current Pattern Instruction, in response to 
the Supreme Court’s recent holding in Kousisis.  
 
The Pattern Instructions for bank fraud (O52) and wire fraud (O51) both state:  
To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly and  
with the specific intent to use false or fraudulent pretenses,  
representations, or promises to cause loss of injury.  
Proving intent to deceive alone, without the intent to cause  
loss or injury, is not sufficient to prove intent to defraud. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 48 of 51

48 
 
The Government does not have to prove all the details alleged in the 
indictment about the precise nature and purpose of the scheme. It also doesn’t 
have to prove that the material transmitted by interstate wire was itself false or 
fraudulent; or that using the wire was intended as the specific or exclusive means 
of carrying out the alleged fraud; or that the Defendant personally made the 
transmission over the wire. And it doesn’t have to prove that the alleged scheme 
actually succeeded in defrauding anyone. 
To “use” interstate wire communications is to act so that something would 
normally be sent through wire communications in the normal course of business. 
 
 
 
This explanation of “intent to defraud” was added in response to the Eleventh 
Circuit’s decision in United States v. Takhalov, 827 F.3d 1307, but that decision was 
abrogated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Kousisis and is no longer a correct 
statement of law. The Supreme Court held that a defendant commits wire fraud 
“by scheming to obtain the victim’s money or property, regardless of whether he 
seeks to leave the victim economically worse off.” Kousisis v. United States, 605 
U.S. _____ (2025). In other words, the government does not have to prove that 
the defendant acted with the intent to cause the victim economic loss. Id. 
Accordingly, both the bank fraud and wire fraud instructions must be amended 
to remove and replace language inconsistent with Kousisis.   
 
The Defendant objects to the amended instruction on ex post facto grounds.   
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 49 of 51

49 
 
Each separate use of the interstate wire communications as part of the 
scheme to defraud is a separate crime. 
                                  
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases O51 (Apr. 2024 rev.) 
(as modified). 
 
 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 50 of 51

50 
 
Request to Charge No. 27 
Testimony of Accomplice, Informer, or Witness with Immunity11 
You must consider some witnesses’ testimony with more caution than 
others. 
For example, paid informants, witnesses who have been promised 
immunity from prosecution, or witnesses who hope to gain more favorable 
treatment in their own cases, may have a reason to make a false statement in order 
to strike a good bargain with the Government. 
So while a witness of that kind may be entirely truthful when testifying, you 
should consider that testimony with more caution than the testimony of other 
witnesses. 
 
Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases S1.1 (Apr. 2024 rev.). 
 
 
 
11 The Defendant proposes this instruction. The government objects because at 
this time, it has not identified an “accomplice, informer, or witness with 
immunity” who would testify during its case-in-chief. Should that circumstance 
change, or if the Defendant provides sufficient justification for including the 
instruction, the government does not object to the language in the Pattern 
Instruction being given. 
Case 1:22-cr-00171-MLB-RDC     Document 227-1     Filed 07/25/25     Page 51 of 51

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.gand.303267.227.1.pdf
Size
390,591 bytes
SHA-256
683ff81786aff3ed440f44e5079a009af7358394297cd62252dafc89179f5d88
Our copy
gov.uscourts.gand.303267.227.1.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top