Opinion ID: 858127
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Sewer Repair and Housing Project Schemes

Text: (Counts 1–21) The first scheme, charged against Robles alone, involved two corporate entities: the Southland Companies, comprised of several housing development corporations, and PSOMAS, an engineering consulting firm. The Southland Companies were developing housing projects in South Gate, and PSOMAS was interested in sewer repair contracts in South Gate. The indictment alleged that Robles used his influence as Treasurer to induce the Southland Companies and PSOMAS into hiring Robles’s friend Edward Espinoza (“Espinoza”) as a consultant; directed the city council to award contracts to the two companies; and concealed or failed to disclose that 6 UNITED STATES V . GARRIDO portions of the city’s money paid to those companies was funneled to Robles and to Robles’s friends and family.1 Counts 1 through 11 alleged that checks were mailed from the City of South Gate to PSOMAS and from PSOMAS to EM Ventures, a company that Espinoza owned and used to receive money from individuals and entities who did business with the City of South Gate. Counts 13 through 15 and 17 charged that wire transfers were made from three Southland housing development projects to Espinoza, EM Ventures, and ETE & Associates, a financial advisory firm that Espinoza owned and used to receive money from individuals and entities who did business with the City of South Gate. Count 16 specifically alleged that Robles failed to disclose in a 2002 California Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests, that he received from Espinoza a $65,000 platinum membership in the Anthony Robbins Foundation, a self-help motivational organization, and that Robles caused that Form 700 “to be transmitted in interstate commerce by wire communications” by faxing it to Sacramento.2 1 The indictment alleged that the Southland Companies and PSOMAS paid over $2 million from city contracts to Espinoza or his companies. Espinoza in turn was alleged to have paid over $1.4 million to Robles’s family and friends. 2 In 2002, elected officials in California had a duty to disclose the source of gifts in excess of $50 on Form 700. See Cal. Gov’t Code § 89503 (f) (providing that the gift limit is adjusted every odd-numbered year). A “gift” is “any payment that confers a personal benefit on the recipient, to the extent that consideration of equal or greater value is not received . . . .” Id. § 82028(a). A “gift” does not include campaign contributions. Id. § 82028(b)(4). “Contribution” is defined as “a payment . . . except to the extent that full and adequate consideration is received, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that it is not made for political UNITED STATES V . GARRIDO 7 Counts 18 through 21 charged Robles under 18 U.S.C. § 1957 with money laundering. Those counts alleged that Robles used the money gained from the honest services fraud to purchase property in Mexico and for a platinum membership in the Anthony Robbins Foundation.