Lexstat 18 usc section 1001 united states code service

4.Sufficiency of Evidence 153. Aiding and abetting

Conviction as aider and abettor of offense of presenting false invoices of goods purchased by United States or by corporation in which United States is stockholder is warranted where, although there is no direct evidence tying defendant to invoices, there was evidence that he was promoter of long and persistent scheme to defraud United States by circumventing governmental inspection as well as by making of false invoices, that makers of false invoices were defendant's subordinates, that his family was the chief owner of business, that he was manager of it, that his chief subordinates were his brothers-in-law, and that he had charge of office where invoices were made out. Nye & Nissen v United States (1949) 336 US 613, 93 L Ed 919, 69 S Ct 766.

In prosecution for violation of 18 USCS §§ 2 and 1001 by filing false customs export declaration, aiding and abetting is proved if defendant voluntarily gave false information or participated in plan such that it was foreseeable that false information would be used in statements made to government agencies in furtherance of plan. United States v Beck (1980, CA7 Ill) 615 F2d 441.

Defendants, who hired 2 undercover government agents to convert counterfeit currency into 5 cashiers' checks at bank, were aiders and abettors under 18 USCS § 1001 where bank did not file CTR's after agents identified themselves as such, since had defendants personally conducted transactions on their own behalf, bank would certainly have had duty to report transactions, and fact that agents did so on behalf of defendants and with defendants' money did not convert transactions into transactions by government as part of its day-to-day operations. United States v Hernando Ospina (1986, CA11 Fla) 798 F2d 1570, 21 Fed Rules Evid Serv 878.

Substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting making of material false statement to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) officer in violation of 18 USCS §§ 1001, 1002; evidence showed: (1) INS had initiated criminal conspiracy prosecution against several individuals based, in part, upon alien's statements to INS agent that she was forced to have sexual relations with one of individuals within day of her illegal entry into country; (2) pursuant to INS procedure, claim of forced sex was "elevating circumstance" that made it much more likely that INS would pursue investigation into circumstances surrounding alien's entry into country; (3) alien later recanted her rape claim after it was disclosed that she had previously told private investigator that sex was consensual; (4) defendant was present when alien gave her statements to investigator and to INS agent, and did not alert INS agent of contradictory nature of alien's statements; and (5) alien testified that defendant had, in fact, actively encouraged her to lie to INS agent in order to obtain remedy for her claims. United States v Mitchell (2004, CA8 Ark) 388 F3d 1139.

Elements of aiding and abetting are that defendant associated herself with unlawful venture, defendant participated in it as something she wished to bring about, and defendant sought by her actions to make it succeed; defendant could be prosecuted for aiding and abetting making of material false statement to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) officer in violation of 18 USCS § 1001, even though there was no direct communication between herself and illegal alien who actually made false, material statements to INS agent, because evidence showed that defendant had fully and knowingly participated with alien's translator in encouraging alien to lie to agent in order to spur INS into bringing criminal conspiracy charges against individuals who had participated in bringing alien into country illegally. United States v Mitchell (2004, CA8 Ark) 388 F3d 1139.

154. Circumstantial evidence

Affiliation imports less than membership in Communist Party, but more than sympathy, and requires adherence to or furtherance of purposes or objectives of proscribed organization as distinguished from mere cooperation with it in lawful activities; desire to belong and intent to adhere and further rather than merely sympathize are mental states; they can and must be proved or disproved by circumstantial evidence; requirement of direct proof is requirement of impossible. Sells v United States (1958, CA10 Colo) 262 F2d 815, 43 BNA LRRM 2476, 36 CCH LC P 65189, cert den (1959) 360 US 913, 3 L Ed 2d 1262, 79 S Ct 1298.

Intent to deceive under 18 USCS § 1001 may be proved by circumstantial evidence. United States v Markey (1982, CA6 Mich) 693 F2d 594.

155. Concealment

Evidence was insufficient to prove that bank chairman concealed material fact in violation of 18 USCS § 1001, by making large personal bank deposit without filing Currency Transaction Report, where he had knowledge of transaction and failed to reveal it to bank, but took no affirmative step to conceal true facts. United States v Shannon (1988, CA8 Mo) 836 F2d 1125, 24 Fed Rules Evid Serv 816, reh den (1988, CA8 Mo) 1988 US App LEXIS 18914 and cert den (1988) 486 US 1058, 100 L Ed 2d 930, 108 S Ct 2830.

Defendant could not prevail on argument that evidence was insufficient to support conviction for concealing material fact from Small Business Administration (SBA), 18 USCS § 1001(a)(1), because (1) defendant's argument that he did not conceal anything from SBA because he informed bank's loan officer of arrangement to finance initial capital investment failed because loan officer was not SBA, (2) defendant admitted he realized that SBA was separate from bank, and (3) defendant wrote check to bank so SBA would believe he made personal capital investment. United States v Moyer (2002, CA8 Iowa) 313 F3d 1082.

As government failed to identify legal disclosure duty as was necessary for 18 USCS § 1001(a)(1) concealment offense, defendant's convictions, which arose from his overseas golf trip with high profile lobbyist, could not stand. United States v Safavian (2008, App DC) 528 F3d 957.

Defendant filed false statements directly with IRS concerning organization's activities as exempt entity under 26 USCS § 501(c), establishing sufficient evidence to support his conviction under 18 USCS § 1001(a)(1) and 26 USCS § 7212(a). United States v Mubayyid (2008, DC Mass) 2008-2 USTC P 50504, 102 AFTR 2d 5348.

Unpublished Opinions

Unpublished: Where defendant allegedly engaged in scheme to conceal presence of asbestos at oil refinery, Government proved "duty to disclose" element of 18 USCS § 1001(a)(1) based upon legal duty to disclose created by forms defendant submitted to Environmental Protection Agency; forms placed legal duty on one completing and submitting them to disclose presence of asbestos and, if present, method of abatement. United States v Shaw (2005, CA10 Kan) 150 Fed Appx 863, 61 Envt Rep Cas 1363.

156. Conspiracy

Moonshiner, not shown to have been aware of grocer's arrangement whereby sugar sold for illegal making of whiskey was reported as having been sold to other than purchasers thereof, cannot be found guilty of conspiracy to violate 18 USCS § 1001. Call v United States (1959, CA4 NC) 265 F2d 167, cert den (1959) 361 US 815, 4 L Ed 2d 62, 80 S Ct 54.

Sufficient evidence existed from which jury reasonably could conclude that defendants conspired to defraud United States and lending institutions, by making false statements, of monies through Federally Insured Student Loan Program and performed acts to further that end, where evidence established that defendants founded, were shareholders or held offices in company owning trade schools in which students, some of whom never completed courses, were encouraged to take part in student loan program and were requested to sign applications for loan insurance and blank promissory notes payable to company, and one of defendants, cognizant of these liabilities, nevertheless, negotiated notes secured by government guarantees and used proceeds for personal benefit. United States v Willis (1978, CA5 Tex) 583 F2d 203.

Evidence was sufficient to support jury verdicts that defendants engaged in conspiracy to defraud United States by misrepresenting to state department of highways that contractor had performed work on highway construction project when, in fact, subcontractor had performed all work, in violation of federal regulations regarding disadvantaged business enterprises. United States v Brothers Constr. Co. (2000, CA4 W Va) 219 F3d 300, 54 Fed Rules Evid Serv 644, cert den (2000) 531 US 1037, 148 L Ed 2d 537, 121 S Ct 628.

Evidence was sufficient from which jury could infer that marina employee conspired with his mother, marina owner, and others to defraud United States Army Corps of Engineers (COE) in violation of 18 USCS §§ 371 and 1001 by submitting false "rental numbers" under lease agreement with COE, even though there was no direct evidence of his participation in accounting functions, and bulk of evidence showed that mother ran marina, whereas he, "heir apparent" to business, having job description indicating he held position of responsibility, was one who called meeting with COE and had control over bank account into which unreported boat sales proceeds were placed. United States v Loe (2001, CA5 Tex) 262 F3d 427, 88 AFTR 2d 5521, reh den (2001, CA5 Tex) 2001 US App LEXIS 22380 and cert den (2002) 534 US 1134, 151 L Ed 2d 979, 122 S Ct 1078.

157. Corroborative evidence

Evidence to corroborate admission of defendant that he had made claim for disaster relief loan when in fact he had had no damages would be required in view of fact that witness had failed to mention defendant's statement in 6 prior interviews with government agent although he was told that government was investigating false statements by defendant; evidence was insufficient to corroborate admission where record showed that one of landlord's agents testified that one of adjoining buildings suffered "big dent in it" due to flooding, maintenance man testified as to extensive structural damages done to one of landlord's buildings, computerized printout of disaster loans showed that 25 flood-related disaster loans were granted within 2 1/2 blocks of defendant's apartment, Director of East Saint Louis Housing Authority testified that when he went to defendant's apartment about 10 days later he saw high water mark on wall and smelled odor, members of tenant advisory board of Housing Authority testified that defendant donated boxes of wet, mildewed clothing to them, owner of construction company testified that he saw large amount of water accumulate behind apartment complex, cartographer testified that defendant had resided in depression contour, service hydrologist with National Weather Service testified that high water condition in area was due to heavy and repeated rainfall and defendant testified that there was gap along bottom of doorway which allowed water to enter his apartment. United States v Fearn (1978, CA7 Ill) 589 F2d 1316, 3 Fed Rules Evid Serv 1329.

What is actually said by defendant becomes critically important part of any prosecution under 18 USCS § 1001 and while verbatim transcript or written statement is not required under § 1001, where transcript of some answers has been taken with no apparent constraint on interrogators to cut short their inquiry, where 2 of 3 allegedly false answers are not included in such transcript, and where one of 3 statements is found only in solitary prosecution witnesses' testimony without any contemporary corroboration, and such oral evidence is too fragile to support guilty verdict. United States v Poutre (1980, CA1 Mass) 646 F2d 685, 52 AFTR 2d 5203.

No corroboration is necessary to sustain conviction for making false statement under 18 USCS § 1001. United States v Fern (1983, CA11 Fla) 696 F2d 1269, 83-1 USTC P 9151, 51 AFTR 2d 819.

Alien's convictions pursuant to 18 USCS §§ 2, 287, 371, 1001, were not "aggravated felonies" sufficient to support his deportation under 8 USCS §§ 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), because none of crimes required finding of monetary loss as element of offense, and neither superseding information nor judgment of conviction unequivocally established that jury had found that losses arising from alien's crimes exceeded $ 10,000; although crimes met first part of definition of generic description for "aggravated felony" under § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), they would not constitute deportable offenses unless they resulted in actual losses in excess of $ 10,000. Li v Ashcroft (2004, CA9) 389 F3d 892.

158. Falsity

In prosecution for concealment of Nazi party membership upon application for certificate of identification as alien enemy, required by presidential proclamation, proof that defendant belonged to a group of "anwaerters," meaning indiscriminately "applicants" or probationary members, sustained conviction, as against contention that defendant was only applicant for membership and not actually affiliated. United States v Dawe (1945, CA2 NY) 149 F2d 491; United States v Koeniger (1945, CA2 NY) 149 F2d 492, cert den (1945) 326 US 725, 90 L Ed 430, 66 S Ct 30.

Conviction of making and submitting false documents to Tax Court could be based on defendant's testimony as to origin of information transferred to books and his subsequent admission that notations from which entry into books was made were not in existence at time of such entry, since in false document charge government need not, as required on perjury charge, prove falsity of testimony by at least two witnesses or by one witness and corroborating evidence. Stein v United States (1966, CA5 Tex) 363 F2d 587, 66-2 USTC P 9518, 18 AFTR 2d 5725, cert den (1966) 385 US 934, 17 L Ed 2d 214, 87 S Ct 294.

Evidence was insufficient to support conviction in prosecution of physician for making false, fictitious and fraudulent statements in Medicaid and Medicare claims where witnesses who were patients were unable to testify that procedures for which billings were made were not performed. United States v Herberman (1978, CA5 Tex) 583 F2d 222.

As matter of law, government failed to prove that forms submitted falsely represented that titanium was manufactured according to government specifications, even though government official testified that he would not have signed them had he not been presented with document certifying titanium as ballistically tested, since, although titanium did not conform, document did not lie, and it was through official's failure to perform adequate review that nonconforming material was certified. United States v Cannon (1995, CA11 Ga) 41 F3d 1462, 8 FLW Fed C 951, cert den (1995) 516 US 823, 133 L Ed 2d 44, 116 S Ct 86.

Evidence was insufficient to prove that applicant for citizenship made false statement on his INS Form N-445 application, where his response to question whether he had made change in marital status after he filed his original naturalization petition was literally true, since his separation from wife pre-dated petition and there had been no change between filing of petition and filing of INS Form N-445. United States v Moses (1996, CA5 Tex) 94 F3d 182.

Evidence was sufficient to support lender's conviction for making false entries in reports within jurisdiction of Government National Mortgage Association, in that, even though reports accurately reflected that payments had been made, they failed to show that lender was making payments from its own funds to mask number of delinquencies. United States v Logan (2001, CA6 Tenn) 250 F3d 350, 56 Fed Rules Evid Serv 84, 2001 FED App 158P, cert den (2001) 534 US 895, 151 L Ed 2d 154, 122 S Ct 216 and cert den (2001) 534 US 997, 151 L Ed 2d 384, 122 S Ct 468 and (criticized in United States v Bailey (2003, CA10 Kan) 327 F3d 1131, 61 Fed Rules Evid Serv 853).

In action in which defendant appealed from judgment of district court denying defendant's motion to vacate and set aside jury verdict, which found defendant guilty of making material false statement concerning matter within jurisdiction of U.S. Government, 18 USCS § 1001(a), and converting property mortgaged or pledged to farm credit agency, 18 USCS § 658, with respect to § 1001 count, there was sufficient evidence that defendant knew to be false his representation that there had been no "material changes" to his financial condition where (1) in support of his renewed loan application, defendant submitted documentation listing his crop year 2000 soybeans as asset; (2) defendant also granted Farm Service Agency (FSA) security interest in soybeans and promised FSA that it would receive some of proceeds of sale of soybeans in partial repayment of loan; (3) nevertheless, despite having sold over $ 11,000 of crop year 2000 soybeans day before or morning of loan closing, defendant told FSA employees that his financial condition had not materially changed since July; and (4) having sold $ 11,000 of that collateral, defendant at minimum placed $ 11,000 outside of agreements pledging his soybeans as collateral. United States v Rice (2006, CA8 Iowa) 449 F3d 887.

Sufficient evidence supported defendant's conviction for making false statements in violation of 18 USCS § 1001; evidence showed that defendant and several other individuals engaged in insider trading based on large corporation's purchase of small company and that individuals agreed to conceal from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) fact that they had been provided with inside information; sufficient evidence supported jury's disbelief of defendant's testimony that he was telling truth when he testified before SEC that he did not trade on inside information. United States v Hughes (2007, CA6 Ohio) 505 F3d 578, 2007 FED App 432P.

There was sufficient evidence that air-monitoring reports provided by defendants were false; government introduced evidence demonstrating that one defendant could not have analyzed samples without having physical access to filter cassettes from air-monitoring devices but that he was in continental United States from January 9, 2001, through January 26, 2001--that is, during period in which he ostensibly analyzed air samples described in reports--and that no packages were sent to him after January 11, 2001. United States v Starnes (2009, CA3 VI) 583 F3d 196.

Evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for making false statements in violation of 18 USCS § 1001(a)(2) because each count was based on submission of false Form 990 directly to IRS. United States v Mubayyid (2008, DC Mass) 2008-2 USTC P 50504, 102 AFTR 2d 5348.

Evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction for making false statement to FBI in violation of 18 USCS § 1001(a)(2) when defendant denied having traveled to Afghanistan. United States v Mubayyid (2008, DC Mass) 2008-2 USTC P 50504, 102 AFTR 2d 5348.

Unpublished Opinions

Unpublished: Reasonable juror could have found beyond reasonable doubt that defendant had intentionally provided false answers to three questions on his asylum application, and had perpetuated those answers in his asylum interview; therefore, evidence was sufficient support jury's verdict on all counts that charged defendant with violating 18 USCS §§ 1001 and 1546. United States v Jamal (2007, CA6 Tenn) 2007 FED App 634N.

159. Intent, knowledge and willfulness

Trial court may rationally base its conclusion that appellant acted knowingly and willfully on appellant's oral "no" response by his continued reluctance to let inspector know that answer should have been affirmative response. United States v Carrier (1981, CA9 Idaho) 654 F2d 559.

There was ample evidence for rational trier of fact to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that defendant was lying when she said that she found out about marriage between grandfather and his adopted granddaughter only in 2004; testimony of grandfather, granddaughter, and federal investigator all suggested that defendant knew about marriage from moment of nuptials, and that evidence was never controverted. United States v Dedman (2008, CA6 Ky) 527 F3d 577, 2008 FED App 203P.

Defendant arranged meeting between convicted felon interested in selling his AK-47 rifle and buyer, took money and handed gun to buyer; when questioned by federal agents defendant repeated lied about his involvement in gun sale and was charged under 18 USCS § 1001(a)(2) with making false statement to federal agents; district court did not err by denying his motion for acquittal; evidence was sufficient to show that defendant acted willfully and with intent to deceive agents. United States v Brandt (2008, CA7 Ind) 546 F3d 912.

Evidence was sufficient to satisfy mens rea requirement of 18 USCS § 1001(a) when it dispelled any doubt that defendant was sufficiently informed of intricacies of air-monitoring procedures to recognize that his codefendant could not analyze any air samples from site without physical access to filter cassettes and that he knew that his codefendant did not have such access during relevant period of time, and thus, would permit rational juror to reasonably infer that representations to contrary contained in air-monitoring reports were necessarily false; evidence also supported reasonable inference that defendant was aware that transmitting falsified air-monitoring reports was unlawful. United States v Starnes (2009, CA3 VI) 583 F3d 196.

To establish act was done knowingly and willfully within meaning of 18 USCS § 1001, evidence must show party acted voluntarily and intentionally, and not because of mistake or accident or other innocent reason, and with specific intent to do something that law forbids. Holmes v General Dynamics Corp. (1993, 4th Dist) 17 Cal App 4th 1418, 22 Cal Rptr 2d 172, 93 CDOS 6236, 93 Daily Journal DAR 10701, 8 BNA IER Cas 1249.

Unpublished Opinions

Unpublished: There was sufficient evidence that defendant made several knowingly and intentionally false and fictitious statements to FBI agents, including special agent's testimony that defendant falsely stated to agent during interviews that he had no knowledge about victim's whereabouts, he had no involvement in victim's disappearance, he did not have relationship with victim, he only knew victim because his children had been communicating with her, he had not given victim any gifts, he needed to leave interview because he had to unlock vehicle for someone in his capacity as town's only locksmith, and even after explaining that victim was safe, he stated she was in one of two towns in Kentucky before finally admitting that he knew she was in hotel in another town. United States v Wise (2008, CA6 Ky) 278 Fed Appx 552, 2008 FED App 273N.

Unpublished: Sufficient evidence supported defendant's conviction for making false statements on matter within jurisdiction of federal government in violation of 18 USCS § 1001; record showed that defendant, as lessor, overstated by approximately 10,000 square feet size of certain property that was leased to federally-funded non-profit organization; evidence showed that misstatement on lease was willful because square footage of property had been discussed with defendant and because defendant was knowledgeable regarding real property transactions; this evidence, in conjunction with defendant's broad practice of dishonest reporting and false rent charges, permitted rational trier of fact to find that defendant was aware of real square footage of property and misstated it deliberately. United States v Madison (2007, CA6 Tenn) 2007 FED App 279N.

Unpublished: Defendant's conviction for wire fraud in violation of 18 USCS § 1343, and making false and fraudulent statements on United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-1 settlement statement forms in violation of 18 USCS § 1001 was affirmed because defendant knew he was receiving more money than needed to purchase properties and stated importance of disclosures on HUD-1 form that was required under Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 (RESPA), 12 USCS §§ 2601 et seq., had "natural tendency to influence" even if HUD did not directly rely upon them. United States v Wilkins (2009, CA6 Tenn) 2009 FED App 72N.

Unpublished: Defendant's conviction for submitting materially false loan application to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development was affirmed because evidence submitted in form of fraudulent documents that had been submitted with loan application was sufficient to support conviction as jury could have rationally concluded that, because defendant solicited false information that was ultimately included in her loan application, loan application either contained false information when defendant signed it or else defendant knew false information would be inserted sometime later. United States v Powell (2006, CA10) 2006 US App LEXIS 1835.

Unpublished: Defendant, who was convicted of mail fraud, making false statements, and aiding and abetting making of false statements in violation of 18 USCS §§ 1341, 1001, and 2 in connection with statements to Small Business Administration (SBA) concerning defaulted loans, was properly denied judgment of acquittal under Fed. R. Crim. P. 29; rational trier of fact could have concluded that defendant acted with necessary intent to defraud SBA by underreporting assets, regardless of any legal advice defendant may have received. United States v Groff (2006, CA3 Pa) 2006 US App LEXIS 9489.

Unpublished: In case in which defendant was convicted of violating 18 USCS § 1001, he unsuccessfully argued unsuccessfully that there was insufficient evidence to support conviction; there was sufficient evidence to show that defendant made false statement willingly. United States v Akinmukomi (2010, CA4 Va) 2010 US App LEXIS 5260.