United States v. Peter Bellucci

Peter Bellucei appeals his conviction upon a jury verdict of making false statements to a financial institution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014 . Bellucei claims there was insufficient evidence that he knowingly made false statements to a bank because he personally made no statements to a bank, and he did not knowingly cause false statements to be made to a bank. He also argues that his Sixth Amendment rights under the Confrontation Clause were violated when the district court permitted the government to use hearsay evidence to establish the federally insured status of the bank, an element of the offense.

I

There is no dispute that the statements contained in Bellucci’s loan application were false, and that he knew the information was false. The critical question is whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that Bellucci “was responsible in whole or in part for the fact that the [loan application] set forth false material information.” United States v. Olano, 934 F.2d 1425, 1435 (9th Cir.1991), rev’d on other grounds, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993).

Section 1014’s proscription of knowing misrepresentation “reach[es] a defendant’s…