Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Bankruptcy fraud – sufficiency of the evidence

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 6, 2011//

Bankruptcy fraud – sufficiency of the evidence

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//October 6, 2011//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals

Criminal

Bankruptcy fraud – sufficiency of the evidence

Where a debtor’s mother died the same day his debts were discharged in bankruptcy, and he did not report the death, but signed away his interest in the inheritance, the evidence was sufficient to convict him and his brother of bankruptcy fraud.

Joseph and James rely upon a line of cases holding that, ‘[w]here the evidence as to an element of a crime is equally consistent with a theory of innocence as with a theory of guilt, that evidence necessarily fails to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’ United States v. Delay, 440 F.2d 566, 568 (7th Cir. 1971); see also United States v. Harris, 942 F.2d 1125, 1129-30 (7th Cir. 1991). The government responds by citing United States v. Keck, 773 F.2d 759, 769 (7th Cir. 1985), where we held that a reviewing court will not disturb a defendant’s conviction when any rational juror could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt after viewing the evidence and all the inferences in the light most favorable to the government. Notably, the line of cases cited by James and Joseph applies when ‘the evidence is woefully inadequate to establish an element of the offense.’ Delay, 440 F.2d at 568. In Delay, there was no direct or circumstantial evidence that the defendant possessed the requisite knowledge to support a finding of guilt. In contrast, the circumstantial evidence in this record is more than adequate to support a guilty verdict. Because the brothers knew of the disclaimer, used it inconsistently, and concealed assets from the estate, their convictions on count one will be affirmed. Similarly, the evidence was more than sufficient on the concealment charges. The evidence established that James knew he was required to disclose an inheritance and used the money as his own irrespective of the disclaimer.”

Affirmed.

10-1188 & 10-2156 U.S. v. Persfull

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Kapala, J., Clevert, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests