PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-4247 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MOHSIN RAZA, Defendant – Appellant. No. 16-4259 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. FARUKH IQBAL, Defendant – Appellant. No. 16-4261 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MOHAMMAD ALI HAIDER, Defendant – Appellant. No. 16-4262 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. HUMAIRA IQBAL, Defendant – Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cr-00118-CMH-1, 1:15-cr- 00118-CMH-3, 1:15-cr-00118-CMH-4, 1:15-cr-00118-CMH-2) Argued: September 15, 2017 Decided: November 20, 2017 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by published opinion. Judge King wrote the opinion, in which Judge Niemeyer and Judge Harris joined. ARGUED: Geoffrey Paul Eaton, WINSTON & STRAWN LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Jack Hanly, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: G. Derek Andreson, Thomas M. Buchanan, Ilan Wurman, WINSTON & STRAWN LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant Mohsin Raza. John N. Nassikas III, R. Stanton Jones, Dirk C. Phillips, Robert A. DeRise, ARNOLD & PORTER LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant Humaira Iqbal. Peter H. White, Gary Stein, Jeffrey F. Robertson, Brittany L. Lane, SCHULTE ROTH & ZABEL LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant Farukh Iqbal. Thomas G. Connolly, Patrick O’Donnell, 2 Stephen W. Miller, Lauren E. Snyder, HARRIS, WILTSHIRE & GRANNIS LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant Mohammad Ali Haider. Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney, Joseph A. Capone, Special Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. 3 KING, Circuit Judge: In February 2016, the defendants in these proceedings — Mohsin Raza, Humaira Iqbal, Farukh Iqbal, and Mohammad Ali Haider — were convicted by a jury in the Eastern District of Virginia of the offenses of wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Those crimes were predicated on a fraudulent mortgage lending scheme centered at the Annandale branch of SunTrust Mortgage in Fairfax County, Virginia. 1 The defendants have appealed, maintaining that the trial court fatally undermined their convictions by giving erroneous instructions to the jury. As explained below, we reject the contentions of error and affirm. I. A. On April 23, 2015, a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, returned a seven- count indictment against the defendants — who were former employees of SunTrust’s Annandale branch. 2 The indictment’s first count charged them with conspiracy to 1 The fraudulent mortgage lending scheme underlying this prosecution touched not only SunTrust Mortgage (the subsidiary entity), but also SunTrust Bank (the parent entity) as the fraud scheme’s primary victim. Because the distinctions between those banking entities are immaterial in these appeals, we refer to them jointly as “SunTrust.” 2 The indictment against the defendants is found at J.A. 27-40. (Citations herein to “J.A. __” refer to the contents of the Joint Appendix filed by the parties in these appeals.) 4 commit wire fraud affecting a financial institution, in contravention of 18 U.S.C. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals