United States v. David Camez

Good Law
839 F.3d 871·2016 WL 6068195·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18580
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 17, 201614-10251California2,300 words

Opinion

Opinion

Graber, J.

Defendant David Ray Camez participated in a criminal enterprise, known as the “carder.su enterprise,” that operated an online trading post for stolen and counterfeit access devices and means of identification. The government indicted him under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) for continuing crimes that, according to the government, spanned Defendant’s eighteenth birthday. The district court instructed the jury that it could not convict Defendant solely for his pre-majority conduct. But the court permitted the jury, over Defendant’s objection, to consider Defendant’s pre-majority conduct as proof of the substantive crimes. Defendant argues that the Juvenile Delinquency Act (“JDA”) prohibits consideration of his pre-majority conduct as proof of the substantive crimes. Reviewing de novo the question of statutory interpretation, United States v. Watson, 792 F.3d 1174, 1177 (9th Cir. 2015), we hold that the district court’s instruction, which comport? ed with the law of most circuits that have addressed this issue, was not erroneous. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

The carder.su enterprise engaged in unlawful trafficking of means of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.