Manibusan
United States v. Manibusan
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
A jury found Defendant Marilyn Manibusan guilty of numerous fraud-related offenses. We affirm her convictions and, in an order filed this date, defer submission of the sentencing issues.
1. In Sabri v. United States, 541 U.S. 600 , 124 S.Ct. 1941 , 158 L.Ed.2d 891 (2004), the Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 666 does not require proof of a federal connection between the acts alleged and federal funds, beyond the statutory requirement that the affected agency receive more than $10,000 in federal funds per year. Here, the Guam Housing Corporation (GHC) received more than the statutory minimum in federal funds. Defendant gave, offered, or agreed to give something of value to GHC’s president with the intent to influence or reward him in connection with the transaction in question. That being so, Defendant’s argument that the government failed to prove a federal nexus must fail.
2. The wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343 , is not unconstitutionally vague in the way Defendant claims. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1346 defines the term “scheme or artifice to defraud” in § 1343 to mean “a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.” Contrary…