United States v. Jing Bing Liang, AKA Jing Ding Liang, Juan Fung

Good Law
362 F.3d 1200·2004 WL 626535·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 5901
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 31, 200402-10549California1,971 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We must decide whether extraordinary eyesight may be considered a “special skill” supporting an enhanced sentence in a casino card cheating scheme.

I

Jing Bing Liang had long gambled at cards when he met a group of players sharing a mutual dissatisfaction with the odds imposed upon them by casinos. They decided to get together and remedy the situation, so they began to cheat. It started with the game of baccarat, and the revelation that by turning the shoe in a particular way, they could see the next card to be dealt. Although this could not guarantee a win, it significantly increased the chances of a payout and, when employed over the course of an evening, apparently proved quite remunerative. For example, in November 1994 at a casino in Las Vegas, Liang and four others won $1,500,000 by peeking at the shoe.

This proved enticing, so the scale and sophistication of the group steadily increased. Members began to differentiate their roles: aside from the overall ringleaders, there were those who organized particular cheats at varying casinos and those that were lookouts; some would distract the dealers, while still others did the actual cheating. Liang’s expertise was as a…

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.