United States v. Chung
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19608
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Chung, a former Boeing engineer, provided technical aerospace information to China and was investigated after agents found 300,000+ pages of Boeing and Rockwell documents at his home.
- Evidence linked to the 1980s–2000s included letters, journals, and a 2002–2003 SDS-downloads; Chi Mak and Gu Weihao acted as co-schemators in some periods.
- Limitation period for charged offenses ran Feb 6, 2003–Feb 6, 2008; Chung was convicted by bench trial on multiple counts including conspiracy, EEA violations, unregistered foreign agent, and false statement.
- Government presented trial evidence largely predating and within the limitations period; district court sentenced Chung to 188 months’ imprisonment and three years of supervised release.
- Chung appeals, arguing insufficient evidence, Brady violations, evidentiary errors, and sentencing miscalculation; Ninth Circuit affirms.
- The panel discusses sufficiency of evidence for (i) unregistered foreign agent status, (ii) EEA trade secrets, (iii) conspiracy, and (iv) false statement, as well as Brady, confrontation, and sentencing issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supports acting as an unregistered foreign agent | Chung still acted under Chinese direction during the period | No ongoing direction; activity ceased before/without modern control | Sufficient evidence of continued direction and control exists |
| Whether six EEA counts were proven as trade secrets | Documents qualified as trade secrets and were possessed with intent to benefit China | Some documents not secret or lack proof of intent within period | Yes; six documents meet trade-secret elements and mens rea within period |
| Whether Chung conspired to violate the EEA | There was an ongoing agreement through Chi Mak/Gu Weihao to transfer information | No continuing conspiracy with Gu Weihao; but possible with Chi Mak | Conspiracy with Chi Mak shown; no continuing conspiracy with Gu Weihao during period |
| Whether Brady/evidentiary rulings require new trial | No Brady violation; admissions were harmless | Suppression prejudiced defense | No prejudice; no Brady violation; evidentiary rulings harmless |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Lange, 312 F.3d 263 (7th Cir.2002) (readily ascertainable concept in trade secrets context examined)
- United States v. Hsu, 155 F.3d 189 (3d Cir.1998) (interpretation of EEA read by federal courts on secrecy)
- MAI Sys. Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511 (9th Cir.1993) (reasonableness of secrecy measures under UTSA standards)
- Gorin v. United States, 312 U.S. 19 (1941) (espionage standard requires nonpublic information and intent to advantage foreign nation)
- United States v. Woodley, 9 F.3d 774 (9th Cir.1993) (prejudice analysis for suppressed evidence)