Court Takes Money Laundering Case

Court Alerts

[##_1L|1077900759.jpg|width="180" height="122" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether merely hiding money that is headed out of the United States can constitute money laundering. The case involves the conviction of a man arrested in Texas while traveling toward Mexico with $83,000 in cash hidden beneath the floor of his car. Police suspected the money came from drug trafficking. Humberto Fidel Regalado Cuellar was sentenced to 78 months in prison for international money laundering.

Money laundering typically involves an effort to make it appear that money from an illegal transaction, often drug sales, is legitimate.

Several federal appeals courts have said that concealing money that is going across the U.S. border, without proving why, also is a crime under the federal law concerning international money laundering.

A three-judge panel reversed Cuellar's conviction on a 2-1 vote, saying that prosecutors had to show that the defendant's activities were designed to create the appearance of legitimate wealth.

Acknowledging that the money likely was drug proceeds and that Cuellar knew it, the appeals panel said the government did not prove that Cuellar was trying "to create the appearance of legitimate wealth." He could have been charged with smuggling cash, the judges said.

The full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that decision and affirmed the conviction, declaring that it makes no sense to say that Congress chose the word "conceal" to apply only in a certain way.

"Concealment of the funds during the U.S. leg of the trip is a vital part of the transportation design or plan to get the funds out of this country," the full appeals court said.

In asking the justices to take the case, Cuellar's lawyers said the appeals court decision incorrectly expands the scope of the money laundering law.

Defense lawyers who urged the court to hear Cuellar's case said the concealment provision — with its maximum prison term of 20 years and fine of $500,000 — has proven highly useful to prosecutors in forcing guilty pleas from defendants.

"The mere threat of a money laundering charge can be a powerful weapon in the prosecutor's negotiating arsenal," the brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers said.

Had Cuellar been charged with smuggling, he would have faced up to five years in prison, the defense lawyers said.

Related listings

  • Ex-Idol Contestant Clark Pleads Guilty

    Ex-Idol Contestant Clark Pleads Guilty

    Court Alerts 10/13/2007

    [##_1L|1349380548.jpg|width="122" height="141" alt=""|_##]Former "American Idol" contestant Corey Clark is facing up to two years in jail and a maximum fine of $150,000 after pleading guilty to a felony charge of harassment. Clark, 27, is scheduled t...

  • Blackwater USA Sued by Philadelphia Law Firm

    Blackwater USA Sued by Philadelphia Law Firm

    Court Alerts 10/12/2007

    [##_1L|1271995640.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]Blackwater has had a suit filed against it by a Philly law firm on behalf of the families killed and hurt last month in Iraq. The lawsuit dubs the incident 'a senseless slaying' and says that i...

  • NYC Lawyer Sentenced for Underage Sex

    NYC Lawyer Sentenced for Underage Sex

    Court Alerts 10/12/2007

    [##_1L|1314848053.jpg|width="120" height="101" alt=""|_##]A tax lawyer who paid a woman so he could have sex with her two underage daughters was sentenced Thursday and declared a sex offender but wasn't expected to spend much more time behind bars. J...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read