United States v. Heid
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 16521
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Superseding indictment charged six defendants with conspiracy to launder money under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h); Heid and two bondsmen were severed from drug-conspiracy defendants.
- Heid pled guilty to conspiracy to launder money, but the district court deferred final determination of the factual basis for her plea.
- Plea record showed funds for Slagg’s bail came from Heid’s home and others; some funds possibly derived from drug proceeds; bondsmen posted bail.
- Two bondsmen went to trial on money-laundering conspiracy without sufficient proof that they knew funds were tainted.
- Heid moved to withdraw her guilty plea; the district court denied the motion, and Heid appealed.
- The Eighth Circuit vacates Heid’s plea as the record lacks a sufficient factual basis to prove conspiracy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was a sufficient factual basis for Heid’s conspiracy to launder money plea | Heid: no agreement to launder proven | Government: guarded statements and context show intent to conceal | No adequate factual basis; no proven agreement; plea vacated |
| Whether co-conspirator knowledge supports the conspiracy | No co-conspirator knew money was tainted | Evidence suggested some knowledge and intent to conceal | Insufficient to establish an agreement among co-conspirators; no viable conspiracy |
Key Cases Cited
- Cuellar v. United States, 553 U.S. 550 (2008) (design element requires intent to conceal in money transportation)
- Phythian, 529 F.3d 807 (8th Cir. 2008) (four elements of §1956(a)(1)(B)(i) transaction with tainted proceeds)
- Hynes, 467 F.3d 951 (6th Cir. 2006) (two mental states required for conspiracy to launder)
- Pizano, 421 F.3d 707 (8th Cir. 2005) (must show agreement to violate money laundering statute)
- Williams, 605 F.3d 556 (8th Cir. 2010) (Cuellar applied to transaction provision)
- Cruzado-Laureano, 404 F.3d 470 (1st Cir. 2005) (concealment may be shown by circumstantial evidence)
- Shoff, 151 F.3d 889 (8th Cir. 1998) (money laundering statute not a broad 'money spending' statute)
- Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (1971) (record must reflect plea-bargain inquiries)