By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 27, 2014//
U.S. Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Criminal
Wire Fraud – defenses — jury instructions
A defendant charged with wire fraud is not entitled to a buyer-seller instruction.
“The buyer-seller instruction, however, does not provide a defense to an element contained in a charge for wire fraud. The government must prove the following elements to convict a defendant of wire fraud: ‘(1) the defendant participated in a scheme to defraud; (2) the defendant intended to defraud; and (3) a use of an interstate wire in furtherance of the fraudulent scheme.’ United States v. Turner, 551 F.3d 657, 664 (7th Cir. 2008). Walker argues that the buyer-seller instruction encompasses his defense to the scheme-to-defraud element. However, ‘a scheme to defraud is conduct intended or reasonably calculated to deceive a person of ordinary prudence or comprehension.’ United States v. Hanson, 41 F.3d 580, 583 (10th Cir. 1994). It does not involve an agreement with another to commit a crime. Accordingly, the existence of a mere buyer-seller relationship is not a defense to the scheme-to-defraud element of wire fraud. As such, the failure to include Walker’s buyer-seller instruction did not deny Walker a fair trial and it was not error for the district court to reject that instruction.”
Affirmed.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Leinenweber, J., Gilbert, J.