Opinion ID: 345177
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Cassidy.

Text: 30 By reference to the briefs of the other appellants, Cassidy challenges the sufficiency of the evidence which convicted him of the conspiracy in this case. 31 At trial, the government produced evidence which showed that Cassidy was actively involved in the Eurovest operation. He made false representations concerning the enterprise and he sold insurance binders which purported to protect any fees advanced by the victims. These binders were an integral part of the scheme. Victims would not proffer advance fees without some form of protection. In fact, however, Cassidy's binders did not protect the fees, and Cassidy knew that his binders were worthless. 32 Cassidy does not contest most of these facts. Instead he argues that he did not have any intent to join and participate in the conspiracy. On the contrary, he says, he was acting solely in the role of an F.B.I. informer throughout his association with Eurovest. 33 The government produced witnesses who testified that Cassidy went beyond his informant role in making false representations to Eurovest victims. Also, the testimony showed that Cassidy did not inform the F.B.I. that he had made such representations. 34 The jury was entitled to believe that Cassidy actively participated in the Eurovest scheme and that he had the necessary intent to defraud. The jury was not required to believe that Cassidy was acting solely as a government informant, and it did not. Therefore, we affirm Cassidy's conviction on the conspiracy count.