U.S. v. Chanu

Record supported jury’s guilty verdict on wire fraud charges, where evidence showed that defendants placed manual “spoofing” orders for precious metals that defendants intended to withdraw before being filled. Jury could properly have found that defendants engaged in scheme to defraud by means of implied misrepresentation that defendants wanted to fill said spoofing orders, in effort to manipulate market for precious metals in their favor by placing said orders. Ct rejected defendants’ claim that wire fraud statute required proof of affirmative misrepresentation as opposed to implied misrepresentation, and further held that defendants’ implied misrepresentation was material misrepresentation. Also, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in admitting electronic communication in which one defendant used term “spoofing,” even though defendants argued that “spoofing” that was at issue in communication was different in kind than spoofing at issue in charged offenses, where Dist. Ct. could properly find that defendant’s use of “spoofing” term in communication demonstrated defendant’s consciousness of guilt, and that defendant knew that different variety of “spoofing” was illegal. Too, Dist. Ct. properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss indictment on speedy trial grounds, where (1) record showed that Dist. Ct. took 189 days to resolve defendants’ motion to dismiss, but had failed to make required ends-of-justice finding at time it continued matter to resolve motion to dismiss; (2) Dist. Ct. could properly find that ends-of-justice considerations outweighed defendant’s interest in speedy trial and justified continuance that resulted from pendency of said motion to dismiss; and (3) Dist. Ct. could make delayed ends-of-justice finding after delay had occurred, but by time it had ruled on defendants’ motion to dismiss.