Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-06099/USCOURTS-ca10-89-06099-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
James J. Wasson
Appellant

Document Text:

\ / · FI LED 

Uoited States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 18 1990 

___________ &OBERTL.HOECKER TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Clerk 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

JAMES J. WASSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

No. 89-6099 

(D.C. No. CR 88-192-T) 

(W. Dist. Okla.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, SEYMOUR, and MOORE, Circuit Judges. 

James J. Wasson appeals his conviction on two counts of 

conspiracy in violation of 18 u.s.c. § 371, six counts of making 

false entries in violation of 18 u.s.c. § 1006, six counts of 

embezzlement or misapplication of funds in violation of 18 u.s.c. 

§ 657, and two counts of ·bank fraud in violation of 18 u.s.c. § 

1344. We affirm. 

Wasson contends that the evidence was insufficient to support 

submission of the case to the jury or to support the verdict. We 

have reviewed the record, and we conclude that the evidence was 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-6099 Document: 010110038703 Date Filed: 07/18/1990 Page: 1 
not only sufficient but ample to support the convictions on all 

counts. 

Wasson also argues that the district court erred in 

instructing the jury that false exculpatory statements by a 

defendant may be considered as evidence of consciousness of guilt. 

We have upheld the introduction of false exculpatory statements as 

evidence of unlawful intent or consciousness of guilt. See United 

States v. Zang, 703 F.2d 1186, 1191 (10th Cir. 1982), cert. 

denied, 464 U.S. 828 (1983); United States v. Ingram, 600 F.2d 

260, 262 (10th Cir. 1979); United States v. Tager, 481 F.2d 97, 

100 (10th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 914 (1974). The 

record reflects there was an evidentiary basis for giving the 

instruction in this case. 

Finally, Wasson asserts that the district court erred by 

instructing the jury that the fabrication of evidence after a 

crime has been committed may show consciousness of guilt on the 

part of a defendant. We have held that "fabrication of evidence 

of innocence is cogent evidence of guilt." Samuels v. United 

States, 397 F.2d 31, 32 (10th Cir. 1968) (citing Wilson v. United 

States, 162 U.S. 613 (1896)); see also United States v. Jones, 578 

F.2d 1332, 1338 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 913 (1978). 

Consequently, an instruction to that effect is appropriate. See, 

~, United States v. Scheibe!, 870 F.2d 818, 822 (2d Cir. 1989). 

The evidence that Wasson and his co-defendant, Melvin Pulliam, 

fabricated the alleged September 1985 agreement to purchase the 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-6099 Document: 010110038703 Date Filed: 07/18/1990 Page: 2 
Oklahoma Housing Finance Authority bonds clearly supported the 

instruction in this case. 

The district court judgment is AFFIRMED. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

Stephanie K. Seymour 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-6099 Document: 010110038703 Date Filed: 07/18/1990 Page: 3