Wire Fraud – defenses — jury instructions

Listen to this article

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.

13-2145 U.S. v. Walker

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Leinenweber, J., Gilbert, J.