Opinion ID: 5129329
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud

Text: Next, Kusi challenges his conviction for conspiracy to commit mail fraud, arguing he did not know King and Reynolds were using fake checks to pay off his debts. As the District Court explained, a conspiracy may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, and a jury may infer the existence of a conspiracy based on the totality of the evidence. 3 At another point, the Judge asked, “So what more do you want from a witness who doesn’t even pretend to be an expert?” (App. at 1388.) 4 United States v. Brodie, 403 F.3d 123, 134 (3d Cir. 2005). Finding substantial evidence in the record, we will affirm Kusi’s conviction. King and Kusi both testified that at their initial meeting, Kusi explained his debt, and King agreed to provide Kusi with checks. King and Reynolds also informed Kusi that they would create the checks on a computer, and that Reynolds would use her “private estate” to manage the payoffs. And Kusi was familiar with money, using several business accounts to operate his car rental company. The jury had sufficient evidence to conclude Kusi understood the nature of these transactions and intended to join King in a conspiracy. So we will affirm.