Perjury Conviction Affirmed

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the perjury conviction of the former Baltimore City State’s Attorney but vacated her conviction for mortgage fraud

Marilyn Mosby (“Appellant”), the former Baltimore City State’s Attorney, was convicted of mortgage fraud and perjury in bifurcated jury trials. On appeal, Appellant asserts that her convictions for perjury should be vacated because the question on the predicate document upon which her perjury convictions were based was fundamentally ambiguous. She additionally asserts that the district court erroneously admitted evidence regarding Appellant’s use of the funds she obtained as a result of her perjury. As to her mortgage fraud conviction, Appellant asserts that it should be vacated because the district court gave the jury an erroneous venue instruction, the weight of evidence did not support the jury’s finding with respect to venue, and the district court improperly permitted cross examination about Appellant’s perjury convictions. Last, Appellant asserts that the district court’s forfeiture order, which was predicated on her mortgage fraud conviction, must be vacated because it was not authorized by statute and was unconstitutionally excessive.

We discern no error in the district court’s adjudication of Appellant’s perjury convictions. But, on the specific circumstances of this case, we agree with Appellant that the district court’s jury charge with respect to venue in her mortgage fraud trial was erroneous. On that ground, we vacate Appellant’s mortgage fraud conviction without reaching her remaining arguments. And because the district court’s forfeiture order hinges on the mortgage fraud conviction, it is likewise vacated.

Circuit Judge Niemeyer would affirm on the venue instruction issue

In sum, this evidence showed that the false gift letter was prepared and executed in Maryland by Mosby and her husband on or before February 10, 2021, when it was transmitted to her broker in Florida to enable approval of the loan before closing; that Mosby was in Maryland during that period up until February 16, 2021, when she traveled to Florida; and that she attended the closing in Florida on February 19, 2021, which was enabled by the false gift letter. In these circumstances, venue was clearly proper in either Maryland or Florida, where the conduct elements of a § 1014 violation were carried out.

…Mosby’s concern that the instruction allowed the jury to consider preparatory acts in finding venue is abated by the fact that the government introduced no preparatory acts when presenting evidence of conduct for purposes of venue.

For these reasons, I would affirm the jury’s finding of venue in Maryland, the district court’s approval of that finding, and the court’s instructions to the jury with respect to venue.

The oral argument is linked here. (Mike Frisch)