United States v. Curescu, 674 F.3d 735

Defendants Curescu and Olivella were tried together for bribery of a federally assisted agency under 18 U.S.C. § 666 and for conspiracy under § 371; Olivella was convicted and Curescu retried and convicted, with consolidated appeals.
Curescu hired government informant Romasanta to obtain zoning approval for two residential units; she bribed city employees and collected fees via payments from the government.
Romasanta later testified about an earlier $8,000 bribe for two units at another property; the first bribe was later shown to involve four units, creating potential false testimony under Napue.
Olivella participated in a plumbing-bribe scheme, receiving money from Garneata (a plumber) who paid Olivella to certify illegal plumbing as compliant; Garneata recorded conversations used as key evidence.
District court allowed Romasanta’s testimony about what Curescu said and meant, and Olivella challenged admission of prior bribes evidence and joinder; government sought to admit nuanced private-language interpretations of conversations.
Court addressed issues concerning evidentiary rulings, sufficiency of evidence for Olivella, severance/joinder, and alleged improper propensity evidence; ultimately affirmed the convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of prior bribery testimony under Napue	Romasanta’s prior bribes supported guilt; false testimony for four units undermines reliability	False testimony should mandate new trial	No reversible error; not sufficient to require new trial under Napue
Interpretation of witness statements about private language	Testimony clarified meaning of coded language used in bribery	Such testimony improperly invades speaker’s intent	Permissible lay opinion under Rule 701 to explain private language
Sufficiency and use of prior-crimes evidence against Olivella	Prior bribery acts show motive and knowledge; supports conviction	Propensity evidence improperly inflates guilt	Evidence sufficient beyond reasonable doubt; prior-bribes properly considered under 404(b) to show absence of mistake
Joinder and severance; cross-issues with Curescu	Joinder proper due to overlapping conspiracies	Severance required to avoid prejudicing against Olivella	Joinder proper; no reversible severance error as to trial outcome
Garneata statement not everything in the recordings were true	Recordings contain reliable evidence of influence on Olivella	Statement could be used to impeach Garneata; not independent exculpatory evidence	Garneata’s admission not exonerating; statement not useful to alter conviction

Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (U.S. 1959) (prosecutor cannot knowingly use false evidence to obtain conviction)
United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499 (U.S. 1983) (limits on government misconduct and reversal rules)
United States v. Wantuch, 525 F.3d 505 (7th Cir. 2008) (allowing lay opinion about inferred meaning in conversations)
United States v. Maloney, 71 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 1995) (private language in criminal conversations; permissible interpretation by listener)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency of evidence standard for verdicts)