United States v. Tu Ngoc Tran

583 F. App'x 617
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 14, 2014
Docket13-30104
StatusUnpublished

This text of 583 F. App'x 617 (United States v. Tu Ngoc Tran) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Tu Ngoc Tran, 583 F. App'x 617 (9th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant Tu Ngoc Tran appeals his conviction for wire fraud, see 18 U.S.C. § 1343, as well as his 63 month sentence of imprisonment. We affirm.

1. The district court did not err in refusing to give Tran’s proposed specific intent instruction. To sustain a conviction for wire fraud, the government was required to show “only” that Tran had “[a] specific intent to defraud.” United States v. Jinian, 725 F.3d 954, 966 (9th Cir.2013). The district court’s instructions were sufficient because they specifically required the jury to find that Tran “acted with the intent to defraud.”

2. The district court also did not clearly err in finding that Tran was a “manager” under U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(c). The district court’s finding was supported by factual statements in the presentence report and evidence in the record showing that Tran organized and directed the activities of two other participants, Huy Anh Nguyen and Minhthy Nguyen. See United States v. Ingham, 486 F.3d 1068, 1075 (9th Cir.2007); United States v. Narte, 197 F.3d 959, 966 (9th Cir.1999); United States v. Beltran, 165 F.3d 1266, 1271 (9th Cir.1999).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Henry Narte
197 F.3d 959 (Ninth Circuit, 1999)
United States v. Dennis Evan Ingham
486 F.3d 1068 (Ninth Circuit, 2007)
United States v. Jinian
725 F.3d 954 (Ninth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
583 F. App'x 617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-tu-ngoc-tran-ca9-2014.