Wire Fraud — jury instructions

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Wire Fraud — jury instructions

In a prosecution for wire fraud, it was not error for the district court to refuse to give an instruction to the jury that it must unanimously agree on which representation was false.

“Here, the three elements of wire fraud are clearly articulated in the criminal statute itself: (1) an intent to defraud, (2) participation in a scheme to defraud, and (3) the use of interstate wires in furtherance of the scheme to defraud. Sheneman, 682 F.3d at 628. We agree with the reasoning of these circuits and find that the fraudulent representations or omissions committed by Daniel were ‘underlying brute facts’ of the verdict against him: that is, they were merely the means he used to commit an element of the crime. We conclude that the instructions used in this case accurately conveyed the law and were all that was necessary. Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it declined to give the additional specific unanimity instruction Daniel requested.”

Affirmed.

13-2399 U.S. v. Daniel

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Gottschall, J., Bauer, J.