Opinion ID: 705213
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Conspiracy to Commit Theft of Real Property

Text: 10 Cruz challenges his conviction for conspiracy to commit theft of real property 2 on the sole ground that the government failed to prove an essential element of the crimes: that the real property involved was owned by the government or by a third party. 11 The Guam statute defining the offense of Theft of Property provides: A person is guilty of theft if he unlawfully transfers immovable property or any interest therein with intent to deprive him thereof. 9 Guam Code Ann. Sec. 43.30(b) (emphasis added). Thus the government only had to show that Guam had an interest in the real property involved, regardless of whether that interest was in fee simple or otherwise. Guam v. Gill, 61 F.3d 688 (9th Cir.1995). The testimony of Frank Castro, the Director of the Department of Land Management, sufficed for this purpose. Castro testified that the lots concerned were contained within the property which was transferred from the United States to the Territory of Guam in the 1950's. We conclude Castro's testimony was sufficient evidence for a rational trier of fact to conclude that Guam had an interest in the real property in issue.