United States v. Guy Williams

MEMORANDUM

Guy Williams and his father Brent Williams (collectively “Defendants”) appeal their jury convictions for conspiracy to commit mail fraud and/or wire fraud, two counts of mail fraud, thirteen counts of wire fraud, and twenty-two counts of transactional money laundering. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1349 , 1341, 1343, 1957(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. Under our caselaw interpreting the intent element of mail fraud, the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding evidence of post-conspiracy collection efforts of Mathon Fund’s defaulted loans (or evidence that the Defendants personally attempted to collect on any defaulted loans at no cost to their victims). See United States v. Benny, 786 F.2d 1410, 1417 (9th Cir.1986) (“While an honest, good-faith belief in the truth of the misrepresentations may negate intent to defraud, a good-faith belief that the victim will be repaid and will sustain no loss is no defense at all.”); see also United States v. Treadwell, 593 F.3d 990, 995-99 (9th Cir.2010). Because the district court’s eviden-tiary ruling was well within its discretion, “we reject [Defendants’] attempts to ‘con-stitutionalize’…