UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-4471 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CARINE KOJIA ALEAH EP MBENDEKE, a/k/a Carine Aleah Mbendeke, Defendant - Appellant. No. 17-4490 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. IRENE MARIE MBONO, a/k/a Irene Marie Settles, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:16-cr-00272-LMB-1; 1:16-cr- 00272-LMB-2) Submitted: June 25, 2018 Decided: September 19, 2018 Before KEENAN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Burnham, BURNHAM & GOROKHOV PLLC, Washington, D.C.; Melinda L. VanLowe, LAW OFFICE OF MELINDA L. VANLOWE, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellants. Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney, Michael D. Minerva, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Christopher Catizone, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Carine Kojia Aleah Ep Mbendeke and Irene Marie Mbono were indicted for their participation in a conspiracy to obtain permanent resident status for Cameroonian nationals by arranging fraudulent marriages with American citizens. Following a jury trial, Mbendeke was convicted of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2012) (Count 1). Mbono, who elected to be tried by the district court during the same trial, was also convicted of Count 1, as well as making a materially false statement and representation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2) (2012) (Count 2), and false swearing in an immigration matter, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a) (2012) (Count 3). Mbendeke was sentenced to a prison term of one year and one day, and Mbono was sentenced to 30 days’ imprisonment. Both Defendants timely appealed. On appeal, Mbendeke challenges the district court’s marriage fraud jury instruction and contends that the marriage fraud statute is unconstitutionally vague. Mbono argues that Counts 2 and 3 were insufficiently charged, that the evidence adduced at trial failed to support her conspiracy conviction, and that an immigration official entrapped her to commit perjury. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. We review de novo whether the district court’s jury instruction incorrectly stated the law. United States v. Miltier, 882 F.3d 81, 89 (4th Cir. 2018). In assessing a district court’s jury instructions, “we must determine whether, taken as a whole, the instruction fairly states the controlling law.” United States v. Chikvashvili, 859 F.3d 285, 291 (4th Cir. 2017) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, the district court instructed the jury 3 that a marriage fraud conviction requires proof that the defendant “had reason to know that . . . her conduct was unlawful.” Mbendeke contends that marriage fraud requires actual knowledge, not constructive knowledge, that she violated the law. The statute, however, simply covers “[a]ny individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws.” 8 U.S.C. § ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals