United States v. Goldberg, No. 71-1513.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
Citation455 F.2d 479
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Solomon GOLDBERG, also known as Saul Gould, Defendant and Appellant.
Decision Date24 February 1972
Docket NumberNo. 71-1513.

455 F.2d 479 (1972)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff and Appellee,
v.
Solomon GOLDBERG, also known as Saul Gould, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 71-1513.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

February 24, 1972.


455 F.2d 480

Morris Lavine (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

Gregory C. Glynn, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Robert L. Meyer, U. S. Atty., Eric A. Nobles, Chief, Criminal Division, Michael J. Lightfoot, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Before BROWNING and TRASK, Circuit Judges, and BATTIN,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was charged with three counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. He was found guilty and convicted on all three counts. The indictment charged that appellant purchased airline tickets from United Airlines on a credit card with no intention of paying the charges incurred. He then sold the tickets at a reduced rate to defendant Kelem, who in turn sold them at reduced rates to the public.

Three basic issues are presented on appeal:

1. Whether the trial court erred in deleting portions of the indictment when read to the jury, both at the beginning of the trial and during the giving of instructions;

2. Whether the indictment properly charged mail fraud in violation of 18 U. S.C. § 1341;

3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support guilty verdicts.

When the court read the indictment to the jury, it omitted references to Kelem as an aider and abettor in Counts Seven, Eight and Nine and omitted parts of Count One in the indictment which referred also to Kelem. Appellant did not object to these omissions, but rather expressed agreement with the court's action. Assuming the issue to be properly before the court, it is without merit, since it is only necessary that the jury be fairly apprised of the nature of the charge, and that does not necessarily require a reading of the indictment to the jury either in whole or in part. Robles v. United States, 279 F.2d 401, 403-404 (9th Cir. 1960). This requirement was met.

The essential elements of mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 are (1) a scheme to defraud and (2) a knowing use of the mail to execute the scheme. United States v. Regent Office Supply Co., 421 F.2d 1174, 1180 (2nd Cir. 1970). Those elements were charged in

455 F.2d 481
the indictment. It is not necessary to show that reliance of the victim was induced by misrepresentation of the defendant, nor is it necessary to show that the victim was misled. Regent...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • In re American Continental/Lincoln S&L Sec. Lit., MDL No. 834.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Arizona
    • 18 Junio 1992
    ...1311, 1318, 117 L.Ed.2d 532 (1992). Plaintiffs need not rely on predicate acts of mail or wire fraud, however. United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972). In addition, the court has ruled that a presumption of re......
  • U.S. v. Harvey, No. 75-1846
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 24 Agosto 1976
    ...Polizzi, 500 F.2d 856, 876 (9th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1120, 95 S.Ct. 802, 42 L.Ed.2d 820 (1975); United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 480 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 Second, we find no error in the District Court's denial of Harvey'......
  • U.S. v. Halbert, No. 78-3278
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 6 Marzo 1981
    ...is the intent of the person making the statement that it be in furtherance of some fraudulent purpose. United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972); Irwin v. United States, 338 F.2d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. ......
  • Shaw v. Rolex Watch USA, Inc., No. 86 Civ. 5244 (WCC).
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 21 Diciembre 1989
    ...of the mails to execute the scheme. See United States v. Regent Office Supply Co., 421 F.2d 1174 (2d Cir.1970); United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 Even though the mail fraud statute contains no reliance requirem......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • In re American Continental/Lincoln S&L Sec. Lit., MDL No. 834.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Arizona
    • 18 Junio 1992
    ...1311, 1318, 117 L.Ed.2d 532 (1992). Plaintiffs need not rely on predicate acts of mail or wire fraud, however. United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972). In addition, the court has ruled that a presumption of re......
  • U.S. v. Harvey, No. 75-1846
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 24 Agosto 1976
    ...Polizzi, 500 F.2d 856, 876 (9th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1120, 95 S.Ct. 802, 42 L.Ed.2d 820 (1975); United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 480 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 Second, we find no error in the District Court's denial of Harvey'......
  • U.S. v. Halbert, No. 78-3278
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 6 Marzo 1981
    ...is the intent of the person making the statement that it be in furtherance of some fraudulent purpose. United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972); Irwin v. United States, 338 F.2d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. ......
  • Shaw v. Rolex Watch USA, Inc., No. 86 Civ. 5244 (WCC).
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 21 Diciembre 1989
    ...of the mails to execute the scheme. See United States v. Regent Office Supply Co., 421 F.2d 1174 (2d Cir.1970); United States v. Goldberg, 455 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 967, 92 S.Ct. 2411, 32 L.Ed.2d 665 Even though the mail fraud statute contains no reliance requirem......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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