Opinion ID: 775590
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the Government Proved Financial Gain

Text: 70 Angwin also claims that the United States did not introduce enough evidence to prove the financial gain element of the smuggling charge. To be guilty under section 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii), a defendant must commit the offense for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain. See 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii). Angwin asserts that there was inadequate evidence of his personal financial gain such as an agreement to pay or an actual payment of money to him. 71 Angwin's argument is without merit. The statute does not require evidence of an actual payment or even an agreement to pay. It merely requires that the offense was done for the purpose of financial gain. Given Vincente-Morales' testimony that he expected that he would have to pay for his transportation once he arrived in Los Angeles, the substantial evidence of the defendant's guilt, and the lack of any other possible explanation for Angwin's conduct, the evidence was more than sufficient for a rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Angwin committed the offense for the purpose of private financial gain. 72