In United States v. Jaimez, --- F.4th ---, No. 19-50253 (9th Cir. 2022), the Court affirmed Alexis Jaimez’s convictions for conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, money laundering conspiracy, and RICO conspiracy.
The case is very fact specific and does not add too much to the law. The Court notes:
"To convict an offender of money laundering conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) requires the government to prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) There was an agreement to commit money laundering. (2) The defendant knew the objective of the agreement. (3) The defendant joined the agreement with the intent to further its unlawful purpose." The Court found the evidence sufficient as to these elements.
Jaimez further argued, "the district court erred by instructing the jury, in the course of generally defining the term “knowingly,” that the government was “not required to prove that the defendant knew that his acts or omissions were unlawful.” Jaimez maintains that this standard instruction could have allowed jurors to convict him of money laundering conspiracy even if they did not believe the government had proven that at least some of the laundered proceeds were unlawfully obtained."
On plain error review, the Court concluded that, because "Jaimez has failed to demonstrate that the alleged error affected his substantial rights, let alone seriously affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of his judicial proceedings, we need not decide whether he has established a clear or obvious instructional error."
