Opinion ID: 686749
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Burglary of a Boat

Text: 7 In June, to instigate the third sting operation, Peterson approached Samuel Manarite with a burglary scheme. Peterson claimed that he laundered money for a drug dealer in California. He said that during his visits, he and the dealer would invariably go out to lunch, leaving the money aboard the dealer's boat. Peterson assured Manarite that the boat would be left unattended with the door unlocked, so it would be easy to steal the money. Manarite agreed to arrange the burglary. 8 McLaughlin and Jeanne and Robert Manarite met in Marina Del Rey, California, on June 9. McLaughlin and Jeanne acted as lookouts while Robert boarded the boat and removed $18,300 worth of cash and casino chips, plus three pieces of jewelry. Of course, the boat and everything on board were actually owned by the FBI. The three drove the proceeds of the burglary back to Las Vegas. The sting operations, so far as we know, were finished. 9 Samuel and Jeanne Manarite were indicted on January 26, 1993. Both were charged with conspiracy, money laundering, wire fraud, interstate transportation and receipt of stolen property, and aiding and abetting. The Manarites were tried together. At the close of the government's case, both moved for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29(a). Their motions were denied. Jeanne Manarite requested that the judge instruct the jury on entrapment. The judge refused. The jury convicted both defendants of all counts except those related to the credit scam. 2 The defendants moved again for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29(c). The court denied their motion. 10 The defendants timely appeal. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291. We hold that the Manarites' convictions for conspiracy must be reversed. We affirm the remainder of their convictions.