United States Second Circuit

Defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiring to operate and actually operating an unlicensed money transmitting business are affirmed where: 1) the trial evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction because 18 U.S.C. section 1960(b)(1)(A) does not require a showing that the unlicensed money transmitting business was a "domestic financial institution" as defined in 31 U.S.C. section 5312; 2) defendant's business transmitted more than $200 million from accounts located in three states without obtaining appropriate state licenses; and 3) the scope of defendant's activities – involving the unlicensed transmittal of more than $200 million – reasonably supported a forty-two-month incarceratory sentence even if various mitigating factors indicated to the district court that the sentence should not be as high as the 120-month statutory maximum that became his Guidelines range.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/22/2010
• Published 09/22/2010

Judges

• Reena Raggi

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Arza Feldman, Sarah Y. Lai