United States v. Richard Alvarez

996 F.2d 1228 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard ALVAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10009. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 10, 1993. Decided June 30, 1993. 1 Before: POOLE, BOOCHEVER and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM * 3 Richard Alvarez appeals his convictions for conspiracy, receipt of gifts for procuring loans, 18 U.S.C. § 215 (a), 1 and bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344 , arising from his participation in obtaining loans from his employer for codefendant John Novak. We affirm. DISCUSSION 4 A. Constitutional Challenges. 5 Section 215(a) of the Bank Bribery Act makes it a crime for a bank officer to directly or indirectly receive "anything of value, for himself ... for or in connection with any transaction or business of such financial institution." Alvarez contends that § 215 is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. 6 1. Overbreadth. 7 In a…