United States v. Frank Mendoza

MEMORANDUM

Frank Mendoza appeals from his conviction. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we need not recount it here.

I

A reviewing court may set aside the jury’s verdict on the ground of insufficient evidence only if no rational trier of fact could have agreed with the jury. Cavazos v. Smith, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2, 4 , 181 L.Ed.2d 311 (2011) (per curiam). In this case, sufficient evidence supports Mendoza’s conviction under the version of 31 U.S.C. § 5318 (g)(2)(A)© in effect at the time of his conviction. That version of the statute made it unlawful for any financial institution employee who reported a suspicious transaction to a government agency to notify any person involved in the transaction that the transaction has been reported. It is undisputed that Mendoza drafted a report that served as supporting documentation to the Suspicious Activity Report sent to the United States Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and that he disclosed to a person involved in the transaction that it had been reported.

Mendoza argues that the statute does not embrace this type of activity. However, that argument was not…