United States v. Jeffrey F. Bohn
658 F. App'x 554
11th Cir.2016Background
- Jeffrey F. Bohn, a former USCIS Immigration Services Officer, was investigated and charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 for making false statements to a federal agent about his relationship with Laura Maldonado.
- Maldonado, a non‑citizen seeking residency, had a months‑long sexual relationship with Bohn that began after he assisted her with immigration paperwork; she feared reporting him because he controlled her paperwork and threatened consequences.
- During a DHS investigation, Agent Rosado twice interviewed Bohn. Bohn denied knowing Maldonado and denied having sex with her; he signed written statements to that effect and later consented to a DNA sample.
- After DNA matched Maldonado’s sample and Agent Rosado showed Bohn photos of them together, Bohn changed his account, admitted knowing her and visiting her residence, but claimed he had “blocked” the memory and denied intentionally lying.
- At trial Bohn conceded the statements were false but argued the government failed to prove he had the specific intent to deceive when he made them; the jury convicted him on two counts under § 1001.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed sufficiency of the evidence de novo, focusing on whether circumstantial evidence supported a finding of specific intent to deceive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence proved specific intent under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 | Government: circumstantial evidence (long, intimate relationship; concealment; threats; startled reaction; implausible memory loss) shows intent to deceive | Bohn: lacked recollection; therefore no proof he knew statements were false when made | Affirmed: reasonable juror could find specific intent to deceive based on circumstantial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Evans, 344 F.3d 1131 (11th Cir. 2003) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- United States v. Hasson, 333 F.3d 1264 (11th Cir. 2003) (reasonable‑doubt sufficiency review instruction)
- United States v. Lawson, 809 F.2d 1514 (11th Cir. 1987) (elements required to convict under § 1001)
- United States v. Dothard, 666 F.2d 498 (11th Cir. 1982) (specific intent defined as intent to deceive)
- United States v. Macko, 994 F.2d 1526 (11th Cir. 1993) (specific intent may be proved by circumstantial evidence)