Case o' The Week: Bank Bureaucrats and Baccarat -- Xu, RICO and Foreign Relevant Conduct
Chao Fan Xu |
Hard to imagine two victims with less
of a sense of humor, to target for a fraud scam: the People’s Republic of
China, and casinos.
Chao Fan Xu hit ‘em both.
United States v. Xu, 2013 WL
28392 (9th Cir. Jan. 3, 2013), decision available here.
Players: Decision by Judge Goodwin, joined by Judges Reinhardt and
Murguia.
Facts: Xu, and three other Chinese
nationals, “stole as much money as possible from the Bank of China; transferred
the stolen funds out of the Bank of China; escaped, through immigration fraud,
to a safe harbor in the United States; and then spent the funds in, among other
places, Las Vegas casinos.” Id. at
*3.
(Almost half a billion dollars, in total loss).
The defendants gambled with
a big chunk of the money, playing baccarat in Macao, Australia, Malaysia, the
Philippines and Las Vegas. Id. at *2.
There were basically two steps in the scheme: massive Chinese bank fraud, followed
by the U.S. immigration fraud, money laundering, and conspiracies. After the
Chinese government discovered the bank fraud, the defendants were arrested,
tried, and convicted in the U.S. of RICO allegations, conspiracy, money
laundering, and immigration fraud. Id.
at *2-*3.
Issue(s): “Defendants argue that their count
one convictions are invalid because the charged conspiracy was extraterritorial
and outside the reach of RICO.” Id.
at *3.
Held: “We affirm Defendant’s count one conviction because the convictions
are not based on an improper extraterritorial application of RICO, but rather
are based on a pattern of racketeering activities that were conducted by the Defendants
in the territorial United States.” Id. at *8.
Of Note: In Morrison v. Nat’l Australia Bank Ltd., the Supremes rejected extraterritorial
application of the Securities Exchange Act. Id.
at *3. After Morrison, it has been an
unsettled question whether RICO applies to extraterritorial schemes. Id.
In Xu, Judge Goodwin holds for the first time in the Ninth that RICO can apply to extraterritorial schemes,
if there was a “pattern of racketeering
activities” within the United States. Id.
at *6-*7. Xu is an important and
dangerous expansion of RICO’s scope. Anticipate much litigation on what “pattern
of racketeering activities” means: seems a fact-bound inquiry, and it is still unclear
how extensive a domestic “pattern”
must exist to trigger RICO exposure.
How to
Use: Xu lost the RICO
battle but won big in the sentencing war. In another important holding of first
impression, Judge Goodwin holds that it is procedural error at sentencing to rely
on relevant conduct from foreign
crimes in the guideline analysis. Id.
at *20-*21. With roughly $482 million
in Chinese fraud in Xu, that holding
should shave off an offense level or two on remand! Any limitation on the hated
guideline relevant conduct rules is a defense win: remember Xu if faced with relevant conduct
generated from foreign crimes. (Query whether we can expand Xu’s relevant conduct limitation in international drug and
smuggling cases?).
For
Further Reading: On Monday Jan. 7, the Supreme
Court will hear argument on Decamps –
an important case on the Taylor modified
categorical analysis. In the en banc Aguila Montes de Oca (AMdO) opinion, the Ninth took a (largely
unintelligible) stab at the Decamps issue:
how to deal with a state prior conviction that is missing an element of a
generic federal offense. The Supremes will consider AMdO in the guise of review of the unpublished Decamps mem dispo., and the outcome could have a huge impact on
federal sentencing.
For a particularly thoughtful description of the Decamp contretemps (and musings on the much
bigger Apprendi issues at stake), see "When is a burglary a 'burglary'? here.
Baccarat image from http://www.baccaratstrategy.info/gfx/baccarat.jpg Image of
Chao Fan Xu from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-09/02/content_6988048.htm
Steven
Kalar, Senior Litigator N.D. Cal. FPD. Website at www.ndcalfpd.org
.
Labels: Conspiracy, Fraud, Goodwin, Loss Amount, Modified categorical analysis, Relevant Conduct, RICO, Taylor Analysis, White Collar
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home