Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In US v. Mullins, No. 09-1031, the court of appeals affirmed defendants' wire fraud convictions and sentences, on the grounds that 1) a "new or increased risk of loss" was plainly a material, detrimental effect on a financial institution, and fell squarely within the proper scope of the statute; 2) the statute of limitations did not expire as to certain offenses because the jury could find that, by using fraudulent information to obtain loans, defendant and her customers exposed the companies to a greater risk of loss that persisted at least until extinguished by the final loan payment; and 3) the use of interstate wires was integral to defendants' fraudulent scheme.
As the court wrote: "LaDonna Mullins and Linda Edwards both owned real estate businesses in the Denver metro area. Both also entered into a scheme to defraud the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") by using false information to obtain loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration ("FHA"). For this, Ms. Mullins and Ms. Edwards were indicted for and convicted of wire fraud, among other things."