United States v. Linwood Tracy
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Linwood Tracy, Jr. appeals his conviction for conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 . Tracy argues that (1) the indictment was fatally insufficient because it failed to charge deceitful or dishonest means and (2) the government offered insufficient evidence to establish his participation in a conspiracy to defraud using deceitful or dishonest means. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.
We review de novo the sufficiency of an indictment first challenged in district court. United States v. Rodriguez, 360 F.3d 949, 958 (9th Cir.2004). “Generally, an indictment is sufficient if it sets forth the elements of the charged offense so as to ensure the right of the defendant not to be placed in double jeopardy and to be informed of the offense charged.” United States v. Woodruff, 50 F.3d 673, 676 (9th Cir.1995). Because Tracy did not challenge the indictment’s sufficiency until the close of the government’s case in chief, it will be “liberally construed in favor of validity,” as a tardy challenge “suggests a purely tactical motivation” and “tends to negate the possibility of prejudice in the preparation of a defense.”…