Conspiracy — jury instructions

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Conspiracy — jury instructions

It was not erroneous for the district court to reject the standard jury instruction, and instead tell the jury that a defendant can be convicted of aiding and abetting if “he or she tries to help the conspiracy succeed by committing an act in furtherance of the conspiracy and had knowledge of the conspiracy’s purpose at the time he commits the act.”

“Although we would have preferred something closer to the Zafiro or Hand formulation, the court’s instruction adequately captured the required meaning. The jury here was told that the government had to prove that Wu had knowledge of the conspiracy’s purpose, that he tried to help the conspiracy succeed, and that he committed some act in furtherance of the conspiracy. The phrase ‘tries to help’ may not as clearly evoke intent as the words ‘desire to help.’ But the district court’s choice of words here conveyed the critical idea to the jury: that Wu could be convicted only if he sought to advance the conspiracy’s criminal goal. The court was also careful to instruct the jury that ‘association with conspirators is not by itself sufficient to prove [Wu’s] participation in a conspiracy.’ In the final analysis, we find nothing in this instruction that warrants reversal of Wu’s conviction for aiding and abetting.”

Affirmed.

11-2055 U.S. v. Wu

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Guzmán, J., Wood, J.