United States v. Jean Rene Duperval
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1986
| 11th Cir. | 2015Background
- Jean Rene Duperval was Director of International Affairs at Teleco (a Haiti telecom) and received ~$400,000 through two schemes: payments from Terra and Cinergy routed through a brother’s music company and a shell company run by his sister. Funds were used for personal expenses.
- Indicted for two counts of conspiracy to commit money laundering and 19 counts of concealment/money laundering; government alleged proceeds derived from violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
- At trial the government introduced Haitian government-connected evidence (Central Bank ownership, government appointments, monopoly) to show Teleco was an instrumentality of Haiti; testimony established Teleco as part of public administration.
- Mid-trial Miami Herald articles about Haitian corruption and related events prompted defense motions to question jurors individually; the district court repeatedly instructed jurors to avoid media and questioned them as a group, declined individual inquiry in most instances.
- The government helped Haitian Prime Minister Bellerive prepare a clarifying second declaration about Teleco’s status; Duperval argued this interfered with his right to call a witness.
- Jury convicted Duperval on all counts; district court sentenced him to 108 months’ imprisonment (within guideline range). Duperval appealed on publicity handling, sufficiency of instrumentality evidence, denial of a routine-governmental-action jury instruction, government interference with a witness, and several sentencing enhancements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Handling of mid-trial publicity / juror questioning | Government: district court acted within discretion, repeatedly instructed jurors to avoid media; group questioning appropriate | Duperval: court should have questioned jurors individually (esp. Juror One) about exposure to prejudicial publicity | Court: No abuse of discretion; group questioning and repeated instructions were adequate; failure to individually question Juror One not reversible error |
| Sufficiency that Teleco was a "foreign instrumentality" under FCPA | Government: evidence (97% Central Bank ownership, government appointments, monopoly, public perception) shows control and governmental function | Duperval: Teleco not an instrumentality; insufficient evidence | Court: Evidence sufficient; applies Esquenazi factors — Teleco was an instrumentality |
| Routine governmental action exception to FCPA (jury instruction) | Duperval: payments were for administering contracts — routine governmental action (15 U.S.C. §78dd-2(b)) | Government: administering multimillion-dollar contract is discretionary, not a ministerial ‘grease payment’ activity | Court: Denial proper — contract administration is not a routine governmental action under the statute; no evidence supporting defense instruction |
| Government assistance to witness (Bellerive declaration) | Duperval: government coerced or interfered with witness by helping prepare second declaration, violating due process | Government: merely sought clarification; no coercion; witness cooperation by Haiti expected | Held: No substantial government interference shown; no deprivation of a witness established |
| Sentencing enhancements and reasonableness | Government: enhancements supported by relevant-conduct and guideline analysis (foreign-particulars, role, obstruction); sentence reasonable | Duperval: challenges to 2-level outside-US fraud enhancement, 3-level role enhancement, 2-level obstruction enhancement, and substantive reasonableness | Court: All enhancements upheld (wire-fraud relevant conduct outside US; managed participants; perjury supported obstruction); sentence at low end of guideline range is reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Esquenazi, 752 F.3d 912 (11th Cir. 2014) (defines "instrumentality" and lists relevant factors for control and governmental function)
- United States v. Carrodeguas, 747 F.2d 1390 (11th Cir. 1984) (standard for abuse of discretion in juror questioning about publicity)
- United States v. Herring, 568 F.2d 1099 (5th Cir. 1978) (two-step inquiry for mid-trial publicity: whether material raises serious prejudice and whether it reached jury)
- United States v. Kay, 359 F.3d 738 (5th Cir. 2004) (interpretation of FCPA routine-governmental-action exception as limited to non-discretionary ministerial acts)
- United States v. Ruiz, 59 F.3d 1151 (11th Cir. 1995) (defendant entitled to instruction only if some evidence supports defense theory)
- United States v. Henricksen, 564 F.2d 197 (5th Cir. 1977) (substantial government interference with defense witnesses denies due process)
- United States v. Diaz, 190 F.3d 1247 (11th Cir. 1999) (obstruction enhancement for perjury: district court may make general finding supporting enhancement)
- United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. 2010) (standard for reviewing substantive reasonableness of a sentence)