People v. Dewald, Docket No. 251804.

CourtSupreme Court of Michigan
Citation267 Mich. App. 365,705 N.W.2d 167
Docket NumberDocket No. 251804.
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerome Westfield DEWALD, Defendant-Appellant.
Decision Date13 October 2005

Michael A. Cox, Attorney General, Thomas L. Casey, Solicitor General, and Thomas P. Boyd, Assistant Attorney General, for the people.

State Appellate Defender (by Valerie R. Newman) and Jerome W. Dewald, in propria persona, for the defendant.

Before: COOPER, P.J., and JANSEN and HOEKSTRA, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals by right his jury trial convictions of false pretenses, $1,000 or more but less than $20,000, MCL 750.218(4)(a); false pretenses, less than $200, MCL 750.218(2); two counts of common-law fraud, MCL 750.280; and two counts of larceny by conversion, $20,000 or more, MCL 750.362. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of sixteen to sixty months' imprisonment for the conviction of false pretenses, $1,000 to $20,000; ninety days in jail for the conviction of false pretenses less than $200; and 23 to 120 months' imprisonment for the two convictions of common-law fraud and the two convictions of larceny by conversion. We affirm.

Defendant's convictions stem from his operation of two political action committees (PACs) during the 2000 election campaign and recount. Defendant was the chief of staff of both Friends for a Democratic White House (Friends) and Swing States for a GOP White House (Swing States). Defendant also incorporated PAC Services, with the purpose of providing services to the PACs defendant had formed. Defendant solicited contributions through mailings. A contention at trial was that defendant's mailing lists were stolen from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) disclosure statements of the 2000 presidential campaigns of both Al Gore and George W. Bush. These statements list the contributors to each campaign and appear on the FEC website, along with a warning that the lists are for informational purposes only and may not be used for commercial or solicitation purposes.

Defendant's PACs collected about $700,000 in contributions. Three victims of defendant's solicitation letters testified at trial. All testified that the solicitation letters they received implied an affiliation with either the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign. They also testified that they donated to the PAC that solicited them because the letter led them to believe that their contributions would go to either the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign. They also testified that they would not have given money to the PAC if they had known that the money was not going to either the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign. Defendant's PACs did give money to Democratic and Republican causes, but checks they attempted to give to the Republican National Committee and the Gore campaign were returned, i.e., those entities refused to accept the donations.

Defendant first argues that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his convictions. We disagree. The standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence claims in criminal cases is "whether the evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the people, would warrant a reasonable juror in finding" that all the elements of the crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Nowack, 462 Mich. 392, 399, 614 N.W.2d 78 (2000). A reviewing court should not interfere with the jury's role in determining credibility of witnesses and weighing the evidence. People v. Wolfe, 440 Mich. 508, 514-515, 489 N.W.2d 748 (1992), amended on other grounds 441 Mich. 1201, 489 N.W.2d 748 (1992). The prosecution does not have to disprove the defendant's theory of innocence. Nowack, supra at 400, 614 N.W.2d 78. Rather, the prosecution need only prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. Additionally, "[i]t is for the trier of fact, not the appellate court, to determine what inferences may be fairly drawn from the evidence and to determine the weight to be accorded those inferences." People v. Hardiman, 466 Mich. 417, 428, 646 N.W.2d 158 (2002).

In order to prove false pretenses, the prosecution must show (1) a false representation concerning an existing fact, (2) knowledge by the defendant that the representation is false, (3) use of the representation with an intent to deceive, and (4) detrimental reliance by the victim. People v. Reigle, 223 Mich.App. 34, 37-38, 566 N.W.2d 21 (1997). We find that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence on each element to sustain defendant's convictions for false pretenses. Defendant, through the solicitation letters, represented that he was affiliated with either the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign and the language in his letters implied that he knew the individuals to be past donors to the campaign.1 Defendant used the candidates' names in his solicitation letters. Defendant's later letters represented that he was affiliated with the recount effort of each campaign after the election. These representations were not true because defendant's PACs were not affiliated with either party or its recount effort. It was also undisputed that defendant knew that these representations were false, because he knew that he was not affiliated with either political party's candidate for president.

There was also evidence that defendant used the representations with an intent to deceive. A defendant's intent to deceive can be inferred from the evidence, Reigle, supra at 39, 566 N.W.2d 21, and minimal circumstantial evidence is sufficient to prove a defendant's intent, People v. Guthrie, 262 Mich.App. 416, 419, 686 N.W.2d 767 (2004). There was evidence presented at the trial that defendant used the candidates' names in his solicitation letters, knowing that this use was illegal. Defendant informed an investigator that he learned how to operate a PAC by reading the FEC guide. This guide clearly stated that it was not proper for a PAC to use a candidate's name in its solicitations. There was also testimony from the counsel for the Republican National Committee that he sent defendant a cease-and-desist letter, informing him of his illegal and misleading use of Bush's name in his solicitations. Evidence indicated that defendant mailed additional letters using Bush's name after this letter. The circumstantial evidence presented at trial supported the prosecution's theory that defendant used misrepresentations that he was affiliated with each political party with an intent to deceive potential donors into giving money to his PACs.

There was also detrimental reliance by the victims. Each victim testified that he or she donated money to one of defendant's PACs. The victims also testified that they believed that the money was going to either the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign and that they relied on this in sending the donations. The victims also testified that they would not have sent in the donations if they had known that the money was not going to the respective campaigns. In addition, a victim testified that she sent a $200 donation to Friends and that her check was cashed. Another victim testified that he sent a check for $1,000 to Friends because he received the letter in the mail that asked him to assist Gore in his election campaign. And another victim testified that he wrote a check for $100 to Swing States and that check was ultimately cashed.

For these reasons, we find that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find defendant guilty of false pretenses, $1,000 or more but less than $20,000, and false pretenses, less than $200.

Defendant also argues that there was insufficient evidence to find him guilty of two counts of common-law fraud because the Bush and Gore campaigns did not suffer any loss. We disagree. MCL 750.280 defines the crime as the commission "of any gross fraud or cheat at common law...." Defendant's convictions for common-law fraud were based on the losses suffered by the Bush and Gore campaigns as a result of defendant's solicitation of Bush and Gore donors. Testimony at trial showed that defendant collected more than $700,000 in donations using the campaign lists of Bush and Gore contributors. There was expert testimony at trial that the repeated use of these lists decreased their value, resulting in the campaigns suffering a loss. There was also testimony from the victims that they believed their donations were going to the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign and that they would not have given to defendant's PACs if they had known that the money was not going to the respective campaign. It can be inferred from this that the campaigns suffered losses because the victims wanted their donations to go to the campaigns, but instead the money went where defendant saw fit. As such, we find that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's convictions for common-law fraud.

Defendant also argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions of larceny by conversion because there was insufficient evidence that defendant intended to defraud anyone. We disagree. An element of larceny by conversion is that the defendant must, at the time the property is converted, intend to defraud or cheat the owner of the property. People v. Scott, 72 Mich.App. 16, 19, 248 N.W.2d 693 (1976). There was evidence presented at the trial that supported the theory that defendant illegally used each campaign's FEC disclosure of contributors. Swing States' mailing list contained fictitious names used by the Bush campaign in its FEC disclosure, and Friends' mailing list contained errors that matched errors made in the Gore campaign's FEC filings. The FEC guide and website both contained warnings that these lists were not to be used for solicitation purposes. By using the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • People v. Hallak, Docket No. 317863.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • May 28, 2015
    ......at 485, 355 N.W.2d 592 ]. 310 Mich.App. 583 See also People v. Dewald, 267 Mich.App. 365, 385, 705 N.W.2d 167 (2005) (holding in the case of a defendant sentenced to prison and ordered to pay restitution that " MCL ......
  • Dewald v. Wriggelsworth
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • May 9, 2014
    ......The Michigan Court of Appeals rejected all of his claims. See People v. Dewald, 267 Mich.App. 365, 705 N.W.2d 167, 173 (2005). Regarding Dewald's preemption claim, the ......
  • People v. Martin, Docket No. 256461.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • June 13, 2006
    ......Dewald, 267 Mich.App. 365, 382, 705 N.W.2d 167 (2005). .         MCL 750.159j in relevant part states: .         (1) A person who ......
  • Dewald v. Wriggelsworth
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 7, 2014
    ......The Michigan Court of Appeals rejected all of his claims. See People v. Dewald, 705 N.W.2d 167, 173 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). Regarding Dewald's preemption claim, the ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • THE STRUCTURE OF CRIMINAL FEDERALISM.
    • United States
    • Notre Dame Law Review Vol. 98 No. 3, March 2023
    • March 1, 2023
    ...(Mass. 2014) (holding that the state could prosecute a credit union employee for embezzling the credit union's funds); People v. Dewald, 705 N.W.2d 167, 172-73 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005) (per curiam) (affirming the defendant's fraud convictions when he solicited funds for two fake political acti......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT