United States v. Kasenge
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 22099
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- Kasenge, a foreign national and lawful permanent resident, allowed Mayanja to use his driver’s license and social security card to obtain employment in 2007–2008.
- Mayanja used Kasenge’s documents to work at McDonald’s and Hannaford; Serunjogi and Mwebe learned of the arrangement.
- Mwanja? (Mayanja) was later arrested; Mayanja, Serunjogi, and Mwebe admitted involvement; Kasenge contested existence of any agreement at trial.
- Government called Mayanja, Serunjogi, and Mwebe as witnesses; Kasenge moved to exclude certain personal details about Mwebe; evidence included a recorded admission by Kasenge about consent.
- Kasenge was convicted of aiding and abetting aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1028A, and sentenced to 25 months, including a 24-month mandatory term.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of liability under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1) | Kasenge’s consent to use his IDs negates underlying theft. | No identity theft occurred due to consent; liability requires theft or illicit procurement. | Consent does not require theft; liability stands under § 1028A(a)(1). |
| Prosecutorial closing argument and impartiality inference | Phrasing implied Mwebe’s impartiality without knowledge to the contrary. | Statements suggested credibility inferences; defense did not object contemporaneously. | No plain error; statements not prejudicial given record and curative instructions. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Henderson, 320 F.3d 92 (1st Cir. 2003) (standard for evaluating prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments)
- United States v. Duarte, 246 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2001) (plain-error review for prosecutorial missteps)
- United States v. Mejia-Lozano, 829 F.2d 268 (1st Cir. 1987) (juror instruction sufficiency to cure error)
- United States v. Moreno, 991 F.2d 943 (1st Cir. 1993) (strength of evidence bears on prejudice from misconduct)
- United States v. Udechukwu, 11 F.3d 1101 (1st Cir. 1993) (plain-error standard for closing argument)
- United States v. Matos, 531 F.3d 121 (1st Cir. 2008) (plain-error review framework)