United States v. Gilbert Max Federbush and Alain G. F. Quilici

Gilbert Max Federbush and Alain Quilici were indicted in six counts charging both of them with mail and wire fraud, violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343. Each was convicted on all counts and given concurrent sentences, and each appeals. We affirm.

I. The Facts.

We state the facts in the light most favorable to the government, Glasser v. United States, 1942, 315 U.S. 60, 80 , 62 S.Ct. 457, 469 , 86 L.Ed. 680 . We state them in some detail because Quilici, but not Federbush, argues that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain his conviction, and that even if it is, reversible error was committed in permitting the government to prove certain acts similar to those charged in the indictment, when, so far as appears, they were done by Federbush, without direct participation by Quilici. We keep in mind the rule that “a common purpose and plan may be inferred from ‘a development and collation of circumstances,’ ” Glasser, supra, 315 U.S. at 80 , 62 S.Ct. at 469 .

In a nine paragraph preamble, incorporated by reference in each count, the indictment charges the defendants with a scheme to defraud. It consisted of acquiring the Windward Bank (actually Windward International Bank…

concurring.

I concur in all respects with the well reasoned Opinion of Judge Duniway and its analysis of the facts with one exception. I do not think the evidence supports the inference that, “Quiliei was in the ‘scam’ with Federbush from the beginning as an active participant.” Supra at 253. In spite of the easily met standard of this circuit, I fail to find sufficient independent non-hearsay evidence connecting Quiliei to the fraudulent scheme at the time of the issuance of the Los Angeles checks to make Federbush’s statements and conduct (“other acts”) admissible against Quiliei. See United States v. Santiago, 582 F.2d 1128 (7th Cir. 1978); United States v. Wood, 550 F.2d 435 (9th Cir. 1976).

However, the later refusal to strike was not error. Quilici’s subsequent conduct in writing personal checks against a non-existent account in the Windward Bank and the tell-tale contents of his briefcase clearly connect him with the fraudulent scheme. When Quiliei “joined and actively participated in [the scheme], he adopted the previous acts and declarations of his fellow [schemers]. United States v. Bucur (7 Cir., 1952), 194 F.2d 297, 302 . These acts became admissible against him, at…

625 F.2d 246 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gilbert Max FEDERBUSH and Alain G. F. Quilici, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 78-3140, 78-3715. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 16, 1980. Decided July 23, 1980. Rehearing Denied Aug. 27, 1980. Jay Goldberg, New York City, Jerrold M. Ladar, Stephen Sommerhalter, San Francisco, Cal., on brief, for defendants-appellants. Cedric C. Chao, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Before DUNIWAY and ELY, Circuit Judges, and PORT, * District Judge. DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: 1 Gilbert Max Federbush and Alain Quilici were indicted in six counts charging both of them with mail and wire fraud, violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343. Each was convicted on all counts and given concurrent sentences, and each appeals. We affirm. 2 I. The Facts. 3 We state the facts in the light most favorable to the government, Glasser v. United States, 1942, 315 U.S. 60, 80 , 62 S.Ct. 457, 469 , 86 L.Ed. 680 . We state them in some detail because Quilici, but not Federbush, argues that the evidence is not…