United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003-06-12
18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: criminal; jury conviction of a jeweller on three wire fraud counts, § 371 conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money-laundering and obstruction conspiracies; direct appeal challenging sufficiency (scheme to defraud; foreseeability and purpose of the wires) and the forfeiture and restitution orders; affirmed; result: claimant-won; claim:
Uncertainty
None recorded
Misfit
The court fuses three declared elements: its "scheme to defraud" test is material misrepresentation (materiality) plus reasonable calculation to deceive a person of ordinary prudence (no declared id; parked in `scheme`), and the second `furtherance` block turns on a materiality finding about the inducing lie. Relations between elements remain prose (known item 3). The ordinary-prudence requirement itself is a circuit-specific sub-test with no law-side id.
Sufficiency on the § 371 conspiracy count is decided on the same reasoning (agreement to join a scheme in which wire use is foreseeable), and the money-laundering conspiracy depends on the funds being wire-fraud proceeds; neither has a declared id.
Forfeiture (§ 982) and restitution (§ 3663A) are measured by the whole scheme, including uncharged wires and the mail-fraud counts on which the jury acquitted, proved by a preponderance. That is a ruling about the scope of `scheme` under a different standard of proof and for a sentencing purpose; not expressible, not recorded.
One `wire` block covers three counts while `furtherance` splits by count; `count` values are free text (known item 8). The source itself is inconsistent about the dates ("May 14 and July 11" vs "May 11 and July 14, 1996") and miscites the charging statute as "18 U.S.C. § 1348" (OCR), which would defeat citation-keyed loading.
Sufficiency review: facts are stated in the light most favourable to the verdict; a `fact` line cannot say so (known item 6).
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 8
| Case | Scheme or artifice to defraud | Traditional money or property as an object | Material deception | Knowing participation with intent to defraud | Transmission or causation by wire, radio, television | Wire transmission for execution of scheme |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | ○ not reached · basis not recordedNot counted: applied/merits | ○ not reached · basis not recordedNot counted: applied/merits |
Elements 7–8 of 8
| Case | Interstate or foreign transmission | Separate section 1346 theory; outside property-fraud claim |
|---|---|---|
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | ○ not reached · basis not recordedNot counted: applied/merits | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Wire transmission for execution of scheme | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; count: wire transfer of March 6, 1995 ($300,000); subject: count=wire transfer of March 6, 1995 ($300,000) | payment-for-induced-sale/item-with-misstated-physical-characteristics | The March 6, 1995, wire transfer was for the purchase of two items, one of which was represented to the Johnsons as a diamond ring featuring a flawless 22.11-carat diamond with a color grade of D.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [13897:14093] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.This ring in fact featured an 11.37-carat diamond with a clarity grade VS2 and a color grade L to M.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [14202:14302] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.These representations were supported with an appraisal prepared by a co-conspirator and provided by Hasson.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [14094:14201] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.An interstate wire transmission is “for the purpose of executing” the scheme to defraud if it is “incident to an essential part of the scheme” or “a step in the plot.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [13672:13839] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.This wire transfer was an interstate transmission over the wires caused for the purpose of executing the scheme to defraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [14571:14694] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Wire transmission for execution of scheme | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; count: wire transfers of May 14 and July 11, 1996 ($577,500 for a necklace and pin); subject: count=wire transfers of May 14 and July 11, 1996 ($577,500 for a necklace and pin) The goods paid for by these wires were not themselves misdescribed; the purchase was induced by an invented buyer who supposedly required these pieces, and that lie was material to the decision to buy. | payment-for-induced-sale/genuine-item-bought-on-false-resale-story | the government introduced no evidence that the physical and objective characteristics of these two pieces of jewelry were misrepresentedSource: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [15394:15530] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.Hasson later induced the Johnsons to repurchase these two pieces, falsely representing that a potential buyer of the Johnsons’ gem and jewelry collection, the Sultan of Brunei, was interested in completing this very substantial purchase only if these items were included in the transaction.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [15006:15296] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.Hasson specifically represented that the Sultan wanted these two pieces of jewelry included in the Johnsons’ collection because they had been stolen from the Sultan’s mother.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [16806:16980] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.To violate the wire fraud statute, it is not necessary that the transmitted information include any misrepresentation.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [13343:13461] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.We readily conclude that the use of the wires to make payment for the two pieces of jewelry whose purchase was fraudulently induced was “for the purpose of executing” the scheme to defraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [17070:17259] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Knowing participation with intent to defraud | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsNot separately contested; the court folds "intentional participation" into its statement of the scheme element. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsMichigan-to-Florida bank transfers; the interstate character of the charged wires was not contested (the fact sits in the `wire` block). | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Material deception | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved | objective-characteristics/grade-weight-authenticity-and-provenance-of-goods-misstated | The government established that Hasson repeatedly misrepresented the carat weight, color grading, and clarity grading of gems; misrepresented semi-precious gems, synthetic gems, or simulants as natural gems and diamonds; misrepresented stones that had been color- or clarity-treated as natural stones; and misrepresented the history or provenance of items sold.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [9207:9568] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.In sales to Aben and Joan Johnson, Hasson misrepresented the type of gems or stones in 314 items and the history and provenance of at least 80 items and gems.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [39782:39940] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.A material misrepresentation is one having a natural tendency to influence, or capable of influencing, the decision maker to whom it is addressed.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [8396:8542] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.The record in this case is replete with evidence of material misrepresentations regarding the physical and objective characteristics of the gems and jewelry sold.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [9044:9206] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Traditional money or property as an object | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsThe object was customers' purchase money; not in issue. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Scheme or artifice to defraud | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; theory: misrepresentations reasonably calculated to deceive a person of ordinary prudence (not mere market-value puffery); subject: theory=misrepresentations reasonably calculated to deceive a person of ordinary prudence (not mere market-value puffery) Defendant argued he had only overstated market value, which a prudent buyer could check. Rejected: the lies went to physical characteristics a lay buyer cannot verify, and sham "independent" appraisals and staged meetings discouraged checking. | misdescribed-goods-backed-by-sham-independent-verification | There was also ample testimony regarding the special training and equipment required to evaluate the physical qualities of fíne gems and jewelry from which the jury could reasonably conclude that the misrepresentations were not easily verifiable by the person of ordinary prudence.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [10221:10502] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.Furthermore, Hasson prepared false appraisals and arranged for false appraisals prepared by co-conspirator posing as an independent appraiser, creating the impression that his representations were independently verified and making it unlikely that a person of ordinary prudence would invest the time and expense to obtain second or third evaluations of the items purchased.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [10503:10876] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.The con included paying co-conspirators to play the roles of the Sultan’s nephew and the nephew’s entourage at a meeting between Johnson and the “nephew” held on Hasson’s private jet, disguised as the nephew’s jet, in late 1995, and at a similar meeting held in a limousine at the Palm Beach airport in late 1996.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [16023:16336] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.That is, not all misrepresentations or omissions constitute a scheme, to defraud; the misrepresentation or omission must be material and it must be one on which a person of ordinary prudence would rely.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [8193:8395] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.Puffery, for example, is not part of a scheme to defraud because a person of ordinary prudence would not rely on it; nor would a person of ordinary prudence engaged in an arm’s-length purchase rely on the seller’s representations regarding the market value of the property when the market value can be, and should be, easily verified by consulting other sources.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [8657:9019] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.Has-son’s conduct simply cannot be analogized to the mere misrepresentation of accessible market values which, as we held in Brown, could not be reasonably calculated to induce purchase by a person of ordinary prudence.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [9677:9896] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Transmission or causation by wire, radio, television | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; count: three substantive counts (wire transfers of March 6, 1995; May 14, 1996; July 11, 1996); theory: "causes to be transmitted": foreseeability that the victim would pay by interstate wire; subject: count=three substantive counts (wire transfers of March 6, 1995; May 14, 1996; July 11, 1996); theory="causes to be transmitted": foreseeability that the victim would pay by interstate wire The victim, not the defendant, sent the wires; causation rests on what the seller knew about where his customers banked. | victim-payment-wired-from-out-of-state-bank | The interstate wires which were the subject of the substantive counts were three wire transfers made by Aben Johnson, the principal victim of the scheme, from his Michigan bank account to Hasson’s Florida bank account.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [11499:11717] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.Mr. and Mrs. Johnson maintained homes in both Florida and Michigan during the time when they purchased gems and jewelry from Hasson and, as was clear from many of the checks written by the Johnsons, maintained out-of-state bank accounts.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [12404:12641] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.To “cause” the interstate wires to be used, the use of the wires need not be actually intended; it need only be reasonably foreseeable.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [6197:6332] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859.It was foreseeable that these customers would at some point make use of the interstate wires to transfer large sums of money to complete some of their many expensive purchases.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_333.jsonl#/f3d/333/1264-01; Unicode character offsets [12642:12818] (end exclusive); SHA-256 0b48e223f26a65a380a150f77101da14ca89689355c39f63faa2a3def0f80859. |