Hubbard

United States v. Hubbard

Good Law
96 Daily Journal DAR 11619·96 F.3d 1223·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 24813·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7098
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 23, 1996Nos. 95-10317, 95-10318California3,339 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Trott, J.

OVERVIEW

Michael Hubbard and James Lyon were convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud related to an elaborate scheme of odometer tampering. They appeal the district court’s denial of their Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, arguing (1) that there was insufficient evidence to support a charge of conspiracy, (2) that there was no “mailing” to bring their conduct within the mail fraud statute, (3) that there was no showing of specific intent to defraud by use of the mails, and (4) that the district court’s partial judgment of acquittal on the charge of conspiracy to engage in odometer tampering was inconsistent with its denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of conspiracy to engage in mail fraud. We reject Appellants’ arguments and affirm the convictions.

BACKGROUND

Michael Hubbard, conducting business as Discount Rent-A-Car (Discount) and as AAA Rent A Car, was in the business of purchasing and selling used motor vehicles. He purchased vehicles that had previously been rental cars, and when he purchased them they generally had between 50,000 and 80,000 miles on them. On some of the vehicles Hubbard purchased, he rolled back the odometers. Then, Hubbard…

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.