United States v. Jabari Marshall

MEMORANDUM

Jabari Marshall (“Marshall”) appeals his conviction for conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349 . Specifically, Marshall asserts that the district court erred in denying his motion in limine to exclude evidence pertaining to mortgage-lending businesses. Marshall also asserts that the district court erred in granting the government’s motion to strike surplusage from the second superseding indictment (“the indictment”).

Marshall claims that his conviction of conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud against “financial institutions” violated the Ex Post Facto Clause of the Constitution because prior to 2009, the 18 U.S.C. § 20 definition of “financial institution” did not include mortgage-lending businesses. Although Marshall was not charged until 2012, the conduct underlying the charges occurred between 2005 and 2007. This Court reviews alleged violations of the Ex Post Facto Clause de novo. See United States v. Hardeman, 704 F.3d 1266, 1267 (9th Cir.2013). Despite the use of the term “financial institutions” in the indictment, Marshall was not charged with conspiring to commit wire and mail fraud against “financial institutions” as that…