Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,013 United States of America v. Meyer Blinder

Good Law
10 F.3d 1468·1993 WL 494517·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 31328·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8867
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 2, 199392-10584California5,102 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nelson, J.

Meyer Blinder (“Blinder”) appeals from his convictions and sentence for securities fraud, unlawful distribution of securities, and violations of the substantive and conspiracy provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Blinder contends that the district court erred by (1) denying his various motions to dismiss; (2) denying his motions for judgment of acquittal or a new trial; (3) misstating jury instructions; and (4) refusing to consider his ability to pay the court-imposed fine. We reject these arguments and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 15, 1985, Blinder, Arnold L. Kimmes (“Kimmes”), and Michael D. Wright (“Wright”) entered into an agreement concerning Blinder’s securities brokerage firm, Blinder Robinson & Co., Inc. (“Blinder Robinson”). Upon demand and at prearranged prices, Kimmes and Wright were to provide substantially all of the securities for “blind pool” corporations. The blind pool corporations were created and secretly controlled by Kimmes and Wright, who used figurehead officers and false registration statements to disguise their actual control. Blinder Robinson subsequently obtained one hundred percent of the…

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.