Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 46

524us1$71Z 02-16-99 22:29:48 PAGES OPINPGT

CASES ADJUDGED

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

AT

OCTOBER TERM, 1997

UNITED STATES v. CABRALES

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for
the eighth circuit

No. 97–643. Argued April 29, 1998—Decided June 1, 1998

An indictment returned in the United States District Court for the West-
ern District of Missouri charged respondent Cabrales, as sole defend-
ant, with conspiracy under 18 U. S. C. § 371 to violate § 1956(a)(1)(B)(ii)
(conducting a ﬁnancial transaction to avoid a transaction-reporting re-
quirement) (Count I), and with money laundering in violation of the
latter section (Count II) and § 1957 (engaging in a monetary transac-
tion in criminally derived property of a value greater than $10,000)
(Count III). The indictment alleged that, in January 1991, Cabrales
deposited $40,000 with the AmSouth Bank of Florida and, within a
week, made four separate $9,500 withdrawals from that bank. The
money deposited and withdrawn was traceable to illegal cocaine sales
in Missouri. Cabrales moved to dismiss the indictment in its entirety
for improper venue. The District Court denied the motion as to Count
I, the conspiracy count, but dismissed Counts II and III, the money-
laundering counts, because the money-laundering activity occurred en-
tirely in Florida.
In afﬁrming that dismissal, the Eighth Circuit noted
that the Constitution, Art. III, § 2, cl. 3, and Amdt. 6, as well as Fed-
eral Rule of Criminal Procedure 18, requires that a person be tried
where the charged offense was committed. While recognizing that a
continuing offense “begun in one district and completed in another . . .
may be . . . prosecuted in any district in which such offense was begun,
continued, or completed,” 18 U. S. C. § 3237(a), the court said that Ca-
brales was not accused of a continuing offense, but was charged with

1