Opinion ID: 176295
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Counts (3) and (4): Money Laundering Conspiracy and Money Laundering

Text: To support a conviction for money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1), the government must prove [Webster] (1) engaged in a financial transaction which involved proceeds from specified illegal activity, (2) knew the proceeds were from illegal activity, and (3) intended the transaction... to promote the illegal activity. United States v. Marbella, 73 F.3d 1508, 1514 (9th Cir.1996). The two money laundering counts are based on Webster's alleged receipt of the $300 wire transfer from his coconspirators. Webster argues there is no proof that he knew the proceeds were from illegal activity or that he intended the transaction to promote drug dealing, relying on testimony stating that the money was wired to Webster as a loan. We conclude that sufficient evidence supports Webster's money laundering convictions. A sender of the wire transfer testified that the money was proceeds from the drug distribution scheme, and that, when he expressed reservations about wiring the money, Webster assured him not to worry about it. Indeed, all financial dealings between the senders of the money and Webster centered on drug sales, which were occurring regularly during this period. Thus, the jury could rationally conclude that the loan, like the prior kickback, was intended to promote the drug distribution scheme and that Webster knew the proceeds were from illegal activities. AFFIRMED.