Babauta

United States v. Babauta

Good Law
183 F. App'x 664
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 7, 2006No. 05-10645California863 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-AppeEant Pedro Q. Babauta was convicted on two counts of making false statements in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal agency, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 . He argues that, with regard to each count, the district court faded to submit one of the elements of the offense to the jury. We agree, and reverse and remand for the entry of a judgment of acquittal on both counts.

The Government was required to prove, inter alia, that the monthly reports submitted to DEQ, an agency of the CNMI, were “matter[s] within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States.” 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (a); see United States v. Camper, 384 F.3d 1073, 1075 (9th Cir.2004) (Esting “agency jurisdiction” as an element of the offense defined by § 1001). By instructing the jury that “the [monthly reports to DEQ] were within the jurisdiction of the United States Environmental Protection Agency,” the district court resolved the agency jurisdiction element as a matter of law.

This was error. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 510 , 115 S.Ct. 2310 , 132 L.Ed.2d 444 (1995) (“[The Fifth and Sixth Amendments] require…

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.