Court filing
Proposed Jury Instructions by USA as to Casey David Crowther — USA v. Crowther (Dkt. 97)
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2021-03-15 |
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida · No. 2:20-cr-00114 · Doc. 97 · 2021-03-15 · Docket on CourtListener
Summary
The United States' proposed jury instructions in United States of America v. Casey David Crowther, Case No. 2:20-cr-114-JES-MRM, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division, filed March 15, 2021 as Document 97. The United States, by the Acting United States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, asks that the instructions be given during the Court's charge at the end of the trial on the second superseding indictment. The set opens with instruction P1, preliminary instructions on the jury's duty to decide guilt or not guilty, what counts as evidence, direct and circumstantial evidence, and what is not evidence, including the lawyers' statements and questions. Its last instructions address knowledge in a monetary transaction, with a $10,000 threshold, and instruction S17 on the good-faith defense. The filing runs 35 pages.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
CASE NO. 2:20-cr-114-JES-MRM
CASEY DAVID CROWTHER
PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS
The United States of America, by Karin Hoppmann, Acting United States
Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, requests that the following jury
instructions be given during the Court's charge at the end of the trial of the above-
named second superseding indictment.
Respectfully submitted,
KARIN HOPPMANN
Acting United States Attorney
By: s/Trent Reichling__________
Trenton J. Reichling
Assistant United States Attorney
Florida Bar No. 0084601
2110 First Street, Suite 3-137
Fort Myers, Florida 33901
Telephone: (239) 461-2200
Facsimile: (239) 461-2219
E-mail: Trenton.Reichling@usdoj.gov
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 1 of 35 PageID 509
U.S. v. Casey David Crowther Case No. 2:20-cr-114-JES-MRM
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 15, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing
with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of
electronic filing to the following:
Nicole H. Waid
nicole.waid@fisherbroyles.com
Brian E. Dickerson
brian.dickerson@fisherbroyles.com
s/Trent Reichling
___________
Trenton J. Reichling
Assistant United States Attorney
Florida Bar No. 0084601
2110 First Street, Suite 3-137
Fort Myers, Florida 33901
Telephone: (239) 461-2200
Facsimile: (239) 461-2219
E-mail: Trenton.Reichling@usdoj.gov
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 2 of 35 PageID 510
P1
Preliminary Instructions
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 second superseding
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 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
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 3 of 35 PageID 511
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, 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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 4 of 35 PageID 512
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;
•
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 5 of 35 PageID 513
First, the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The second
superseding 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.
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 6 of 35 PageID 514
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.
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 such as Facebook, My Space, or Twitter.
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:
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 7 of 35 PageID 515
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 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 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 8 of 35 PageID 516
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 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
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 9 of 35 PageID 517
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 10 of 35 PageID 518
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
CASE NO. 2:20-cr-114-JES-MRM
CASEY DAVID CROWTHER
____________________
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 11 of 35 PageID 519
B2.2
The Duty to Follow Instructions and the Presumption Of Innocence
When a Defendant Does Not Testify
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 second superseding 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 if the Defendant chose not to testify, you cannot consider that in
any way while making your decision. The Government must prove guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the Defendant not guilty.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 12 of 35 PageID 520
B3
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 13 of 35 PageID 521
B4
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 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 14 of 35 PageID 522
B5
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?
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 15 of 35 PageID 523
B6.1
Impeachment of Witnesses Because of Inconsistent Statements
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 your decision may depend on whether the misstatement is about
an important fact or about an unimportant detail.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 16 of 35 PageID 524
S4.1
Similar Acts Evidence
(Rule 404(b), Fed. R. Evid.)
During the trial, you heard evidence of acts allegedly done by the Defendant on
other occasions that may be similar to acts with which the Defendant is currently
charged. You must not consider any of this evidence to decide whether the Defendant
engaged in the activity alleged in the second superseding indictment. This evidence is
admitted and may be considered by you for the limited purpose of assisting you in
determining whether the Defendant had the state of mind or intent necessary to
commit the crime charged in the indictment, or the Defendant committed the acts
charged in the indictment by accident or mistake.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 17 of 35 PageID 525
S5
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 18 of 35 PageID 526
S7
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.
In other words, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant
was a willful participant and not merely a knowing spectator.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 19 of 35 PageID 527
B8
Introduction to Offense Instructions
The second superseding indictment charges six separate crimes, called
“counts,” against the Defendant. Each count has a number. You’ll be given a copy of
the second superseding indictment to refer to during your deliberations.
Counts one through six charge that the Defendant committed what are called
“substantive offenses,” specifically bank fraud, false statement to a financial
institution, and illegal monetary transactions. I will explain the law governing those
substantive offenses in a moment.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 20 of 35 PageID 528
B8.1
Conjunctively Charged Counts
Where a statute specifies multiple alternative ways in which an offense may be
committed, the second superseding 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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 21 of 35 PageID 529
B9.2
On or About a Particular Date; Knowingly
You’ll see that the second superseding 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.
The word “knowingly” means that an act was done voluntarily and
intentionally and not because of a mistake or by accident.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 22 of 35 PageID 530
B10.2
Caution: Punishment
(Single Defendant, Multiple Counts)
Each count of the second superseding 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 second superseding 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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 23 of 35 PageID 531
B11
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 24 of 35 PageID 532
B12
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 25 of 35 PageID 533
O52
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 second superseding indictment alleges two counts of bank fraud, in Count
One and in Count Five.
The Defendant can be found guilty of Count One 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 a scheme 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.
The Defendant can be found guilty of Count Five 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 a scheme to get money,
assets, or other property from a financial institution by using false or
fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises about a material
fact;
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 26 of 35 PageID 534
(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 a mortgage lending business.
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 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 cause loss or
injury. Proving intent to deceive alone, without the intent to cause loss or injury, is
not sufficient to prove intent to defraud.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 27 of 35 PageID 535
A “mortgage lending business” means an organization which finances or
refinances any debt secured by an interest in real estate, including private mortgage
companies and any subsidiaries of such organizations, and whose activities affect
interstate or foreign commerce.
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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 28 of 35 PageID 536
ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTS
This instruction has been modified from the pattern jury instruction in two ways: (1)
it includes separate elements for each count, owing to the different types of financial
institutions at issue in those charges, and (2) it defines a “mortgage lending business”
to account for the presence of that type of business in this case and which is not
otherwise found in the pattern instruction.
In 2009, Congress expanded the definition of “financial institution” to include a
mortgage lending business under 18 U.S.C. § 20(10). United States v. Rabuffo, 716 Fed.
Appx. 888, 897 (11th Cir. 2017) (citing United States v. Stapleton, 455 Fed. Appx 896.
899 n.1 (11th Cir. 2012). Further, 18 U.S.C § 27 defines a mortgage lending business
as “an organization which finances or refinances any debt secured by an interest in
real estate, including private mortgage companies and any subsidiaries of such
organizations, and whose activities affect interstate or foreign commerce.”
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 29 of 35 PageID 537
O39
False Statement to Lending Institution
18 U.S.C. § 1014
It’s a Federal crime to knowingly make a false statement or report to a federally
insured financial institution or a mortgage lending business.
The second superseding indictment alleges two counts of false statement to a
lending institution, in Count Two and in Count Six.
For you to find the defendant guilty of Count Two you must be convinced that
the government has proven each of these things beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) the Defendant made a false statement or report;
(2) the Defendant did so knowingly and with intent to influence an action
of the institution described in the second superseding indictment
regarding an application, advance, commitment, or loan, or a change
or extension to any of those, and
(3) the deposits of the institution were insured by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation.
For you to find the defendant guilty of Count Six you must be convinced that
the government has proven each of these things beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) the Defendant made a false statement or report;
(2) the Defendant did so knowingly and with intent to influence an action
of the institution described in the second superseding indictment
regarding an application, advance, commitment, or loan, or a change
or extension to any of those, and
(3) the institution was a mortgage lending business.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 30 of 35 PageID 538
A statement or report is “false” if it is untrue when made and the person making
it knows it is untrue.
The heart of the crime is the attempt to influence the action of the institution by
knowingly making a false statement. The Government does not have to prove that the
institution was actually influenced or misled.
A “mortgage lending business” means an organization which finances or
refinances any debt secured by an interest in real estate, including private mortgage
companies and any subsidiaries of such organizations, and whose activities affect
interstate or foreign commerce.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 31 of 35 PageID 539
ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTS
This instruction has been modified from the pattern jury instruction in two ways: (1)
it includes separate elements for each count, owing to the different types of financial
institutions at issue in those charges, and (2) it defines a “mortgage lending business”
to account for the presence of that type of business in this case and which is not
otherwise found in the pattern instruction.
Congress amended 18 U.S.C. § 1014 in 2009 to cover “mortgage lending businesses.”
Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (FERA), Pub.L.No. 111-21, §§ 2(c)(2),
4(f).
In 2009, Congress expanded the definition of “financial institution” to include a
mortgage lending business under 18 U.S.C. § 20(10). United States v. Rabuffo, 716 Fed.
Appx. 888, 897 (11th Cir. 2017) (citing United States v. Stapleton, 455 Fed. Appx 896.
899 n.1 (11th Cir. 2012). Further, 18 U.S.C § 27 defines a mortgage lending business
as “an organization which finances or refinances any debt secured by an interest in
real estate, including private mortgage companies and any subsidiaries of such
organizations, and whose activities affect interstate or foreign commerce.”
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 32 of 35 PageID 540
O74.6
Illegal Monetary Transaction
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 as alleged in Count
One of the Second Superseding Indictment; and
(5) the transaction took place in the United States.
The term “monetary transaction” means the transfer or exchange of funds by,
through, or to a financial institution in a way that affects interstate commerce.
A “financial institution” means any bank the deposits of which are 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 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. But the Government must
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 33 of 35 PageID 541
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 $10,000 worth of the property was
obtained or derived from committing a crime.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 34 of 35 PageID 542
S17
Good-Faith Defense
“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.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 97 Filed 03/15/21 Page 35 of 35 PageID 543File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flmd.381779.97.0.pdf
- Size
- 210,974 bytes
- SHA-256
- d434521deb0401e58202dd24e1ddd2e610b87596bcd7c2cea2a281ebd89e806b
- Original
- PACER (login required)