United States v. Camara (P)

The court affirmed the appellant’s convictions arising from his participation in a scheme to resell luxury vehicles using stolen identities.

The appellant’s indictment charged him with conspiring “with Ray Ekobena and others, known and unknown,” to violate three different federal laws. During deliberations, the jury asked: “Do we need to agree the defendant was conspiring with Ray specifically or conspiring in general?” The district court responded: “[T]he government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was conspiring specifically with Ray or other known or unknown co-conspirators.”

The district court’s answer didn’t constructively amend the indictment in violation of the Fifth Amendment. It also didn’t violate his Sixth Amendment right to be tried in the venue where the charged conduct occurred; the government introduced ample evidence that the appellant or one of his co- conspirators committed an act in furtherance of the conspiracy in the Eastern District of Virginia.

United States v. Camara (P), No.17-4602, Nov. 6, 2018. 4th Cir. (Harris) from EDVA (Hilton).



Categories: 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Opinions, Published

Tags: , ,

%d bloggers like this: