Opinion ID: 3014476
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: conviction, we must view the evidence in

Text: the light most favorable to the verdict. Id. Lee contends that the government Where a single conspiracy is alleged in an failed to prove the existence of a single indictment, and the evidence at trial merely conspiracy to engage in money laundering, proves the existence of several distinct as charged in the indictment, 7 and merely conspiracies, there is an impermissible variance. Id. On the other hand, “a finding of a master conspiracy with sub- 7 Count 27 of the Superceding schemes does not constitute a finding of Indictment provides, in relevant part: From in or about December 1990, fact, involved the proceeds of specified through in or about November 1997, in the unlawful activity, namely, bribery, district of New Jersey, and elsewhere, contrary to N.J.A.C. §§ 2C:21-10(a)(4) defendant ROBERT W. LEE, SR., and and 2C:21-10(b). separately charged Don Brennan, a/k/a/ .... “Bill”, and separately charged Francisco b. knowing that the transaction was Fernandez, a/k/a/ “Pancho,”a/k/a “Pacho,” designed in whole and in part to disguise and others conspired to violate Title 18, the nature, location, source, ownership and United States Code, Section 1956(a)(1), control of the proceeds of specified that is, knowing that the property involved unlawful activity, nam ely, bribery, in financial transactions represented the contrary to N.J.A.C . §§ 2C:21-10(a)(4) proceeds of some form of unlawful and 2C:21-11(b). activity, conducted and attempted to conduct financial transactions, which in Joint App. at 120. 13 multiple, unrelated conspiracies and, of the Kelly inquiry is satisfied because t h e r e fo r e , w ould not c r e a te an Lee, Lee Jr., Brennan and Fernandez impermissible variance.” Id. (quoting shared a common goal, namely, to receive United States v. Smith, 789 F.2d 186, 200 shares of the payments from boxing (3d Cir. 1986)). In Kelly, we adopted a promoters. The second step in the Kelly three-step inquiry to distinguish a single inquiry – that the co-conspirators each conspiracy from a series of separate, acted to bring about a continuous result unrelated conspiracies: that would not have continued but for their continuing cooperation – is also met First, we examine because the participants continuously whether there was a cooperated in their receipt of bribes, in the common goal among the laundering of checks, and in the conspirators. Second, we distribu tion of p rocee ds be tw een look at the nature of the themselves. For example, Lee held several scheme to dete rmin e conversations with Beavers regarding the whether the agreement risks of receiving bribes in the form of contemplated bringing to checks, and Beavers deposited checks that pass a continuous result that he had received from Fernandez into the will not continue without bank account belonging to the Portsmouth the continuous cooperation Athletic Club and then distributed part of of the conspirators. Third, the proceeds to Lee. Finally, there was we examine the extent to sufficient evidence to show that the which the participants participants overlapped in the various overlap in the various dealings, in satisfaction of the third Kelly dealings. factor. In establishing this third factor, the Id. at 259 (citations and quotation marks government is not required to “prove that omitted). each defendant knew all the details, goals, or other participants in order to find a Application of the Kelly inquiry single conspiracy.” Id. at 260 (internal shows that the jury had a reasonable basis quotation marks and citations omitted). for concluding that what Lee alleges were Evidence was presented at trial that Lee four separate conspiracies was in fact part participated in each of the four supposedly of the same overarching conspiracy to separate schemes, Beavers was directly launder the proceeds of the bribes paid to implicated in three 9 , and Fernandez was Lee and other IBF officials.8 The first step conspiracies involved direct payments by 8 Two of the allegedly separate U.S. boxing promoters to Lee and Beavers. conspiracies involved payments by 9 Colombian boxing promoters to Fernandez He either received money from and then to Beavers. The two remaining Fernandez or directly from a boxing 14 directly implicated in two. Counts 21 and 23 of the indictment included the following language: In sum, there was sufficient evidence, when viewed in the light most On or about the following favorable to the government, from which dates, in the district of New the jury could have concluded that there Jersey, and elsewhere, the was a single conspiracy, as opposed to a below-named defendants series of unrelated smaller agreements did knowingly and wilfully between the participants. travel in interstate and foreign commerce as