Opinion ID: 2657821
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Counts One Through Six (Corruption Charges)

Text: Counts One through Six charged defendants with various crimes involving the exchange of money in connection with Annabi’s decision to change her vote to support two real estate projects that she had previously opposed, as part of a corrupt agreement with Jereis. It is undisputed that Jereis paid Annabi money, and that Annabi subsequently switched her vote on these two projects. The only question is whether there was sufficient evidence of a corrupt agreement, or that the payments at issue constituted bribes. The District Court recognized that “[t]here was not a scintilla of direct evidence” of an explicit, corrupt agreement between Annabi and Jereis. Jereis App’x (“JA”) 293. It concluded, however, that “[t]he jury would not have acted irrationally had it drawn the inference that” the defense’s alternative explanation for the exchange of money, and the changed votes, was not credible. Id. at 295-304. See also United States v. Bruno, 661 F.3d 733, 744 (2d Cir. 2011) (In cases involving government officials, “a jury can . . . infer guilt from evidence of benefits received and subsequent favorable treatment, as well as from behavior indicating consciousness of guilt.”). It concluded further that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that Annabi received money in exchange for her vote on the two development projects. Finally, the District Court 3 Because each defendant joins in the other defendant’s arguments on appeal, we treat the arguments as having been made on behalf of both defendants, where applicable. 3 explained that the three “overt acts” found, unanimously, by the jury―one relating to the Longfellow project; one relating to the Ridge Hill project; and one relating to concealment of payments―were sufficient to convict on Count One (conspiracy to make corrupt payments).4 JA312-13. We agree with the District Court, substantially for the reasons stated in its November 7 Order, that the evidence was sufficient for a rational juror to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the payments Jereis made to Annabi were part of a corrupt agreement, not a romantic relationship, and that there was sufficient evidence as to all the elements necessary to convict on Counts One through Six. Accordingly, we affirm the District Court’s judgment of conviction on Counts One through Six. 2. Counts Seven Through Eleven (Mortgage and Tax Fraud Charges) Annabi also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence with respect to her convictions for mortgage fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1014 (Counts 7-9), and tax fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 7206(1) (Counts 10-11). The District Court found, and we agree, that the evidence, as set forth in the November 7 Order, was “more than sufficient” to support her conviction on these counts.5 JA313-16. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction on Counts Seven through Eleven, for substantially the reasons stated in the November 7 Order.6