Case: 18-14095 Date Filed: 07/18/2019 Page: 1 of 6 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-14095 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 6:17-cr-00205-PGB-KRS-7 VALERIY TSOY, Defendant-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (July 18, 2019) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, GRANT, and HULL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 18-14095 Date Filed: 07/18/2019 Page: 2 of 6 Valeriy Tsoy appeals his conviction for marriage fraud in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c). Tsoy argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction, because it did not support a finding that he intended to enter into a marriage for the purpose of evading immigration laws. After thorough review, we affirm. I. Tsoy, a native of Kazakhstan, came to the United States in 2011 on a temporary student visa. When his visa expired, Tsoy paid Denis Yakovlev—a sham marriage broker who arranged over one hundred fraudulent marriages before he was apprehended—to find him an American bride. April Moore, an exotic dancer and heroin user from Brevard County, agreed to marry Tsoy because she needed the money. Tsoy and Moore were married at a courthouse in Brevard County on July 6, 2015. Unfortunately for the newlyweds, the Department of Homeland Security soon caught wind of Yakovlev’s marriage fraud enterprise. Yakovlev pled guilty, and in 2017, a grand jury indicted a number of his associates and customers— including both Tsoy and Moore. Moore was convicted before Tsoy, and she decided to testify against him—even though the government promised her nothing in exchange—“[b]ecause I was found guilty for marriage fraud and my husband would like to say that he’s not guilty, which is a lie.” 2 Case: 18-14095 Date Filed: 07/18/2019 Page: 3 of 6 After a two-day trial, a jury found Tsoy guilty of marriage fraud in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c). The district court sentenced him to time served and one year of supervised release. This appeal followed. II. We ordinarily review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, drawing all reasonable inferences and making all credibility determinations in favor of the verdict. United States v. Calhoon, 97 F.3d 518, 523 (11th Cir. 1996). Evidence is sufficient if “a reasonable trier of fact could find that the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. Here, however, because Tsoy moved for a judgment of acquittal after the government’s case-in-chief but failed to renew his motion at the close of all of the evidence, he has “waived any objection to the sufficiency of the evidence.” United States v. Bichsel, 156 F.3d 1148, 1150 (11th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, we will reverse his conviction only if we find “a manifest miscarriage of justice”—that is, if the evidence “on a key element of the offense is so tenuous that a conviction would be shocking.” Id. (quoting United States v. Williams, 144 F.3d 1397, 1402 (11th Cir. 1998). To prove marriage fraud, the government ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals