Opinion ID: 795316
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Count IV—Wire Fraud

Text: 74 Edelmann argues that the second wire fraud count fails because the government failed to prove a scheme to defraud Richardson, as the transactions between Richardson and Edelmann were debtor-creditor transactions properly secured by legitimate promissory notes. 75 The government, however, offered at least 11 exhibits to substantiate the scheme to defraud Richardson of $250,000 in Count III. In addition, the government submitted approximately eight additional exhibits to show that Edelmann continued her scheme to defraud Richardson of an additional $50,000. Richardson testified to the terms of the additional loan and documentation signed by Edelmann that was intended to secure the loan. Therefore, any promissory notes Edelmann signed were a part of her scheme to defraud Richardson and were procured through false representations to Richardson. Therefore, we find that a reasonable trier of fact could conclude that Edelmann engaged in a scheme to defraud Richardson as charged in Count IV.