United States v. Richard E. Hove

Bad Law
52 F.3d 233·1995 WL 148276·41 Fed. R. Serv. 1266·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 7611·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2475
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 6, 199593-10219California1,762 words

Opinion

Opinion

Canby, J.

Richard Hove appeals his jury convictions for structuring currency transactions in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§ 5322 (a) and 5324(3). Hove contends that the jury was not instructed properly and that the court made a variety of evidentiary errors. In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Ratzlaf v. United States, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 655 , 126 L.Ed.2d 615 (1994), we reverse Hove’s conviction and remand for a new trial.

I

BACKGROUND

Between May 19, 1987, and June 29, 1987, Richard Hove, an attorney, purchased $38,-000 worth of cashier’s cheeks. The cheeks were all under $10,000, and all made out to Chicago Title Company. Three of the checks were purchased on the same day from three different banks. During this same time, Hove made $42,500 worth of cash deposits. The deposits were all under $10,000, and a check was written on this account to Chicago Title Company for $42,500.

The cash all came from one of Hove’s clients, Norman Heifner, whom Hove allegedly believed to be putting together a land deal for several investors to purchase property in Happy Valley, Arizona. In fact, Heif-ner — a convicted drug dealer with large sums of cash — was purchasing the property himself and…

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.