United States v. Louper-Morris
672 F.3d 539
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Louper-Morris and Morris formed CyberStudy 101 to sell online educational software with a proposed tax-credit incentive that relied on interactive tutoring.
- They marketed a free computer and internet access campaign that obscured the true cost and created perceptions of charity rather than a for‑profit venture.
- The government alleged a scheme involving forged powers of attorney, fake pool loans, and misrepresented tax refunds to obtain tax credits and funds from Minnesota.
- Evidence showed leadership and extensive participation by multiple individuals in forged documents, customer recruitment, and tax‑return filings.
- Convictions were returned on multiple counts; Louper-Morris and Morris were sentenced, with substantial restitution ordered to the state and to K‑Mart.
- A post-trial challenge asserted Batson issues, witness intimidation, and various sentencing enhancements; the district court denied these challenges and the appeals followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Louper-Morris argues evidence does not prove conspiracy, mail, or wire fraud. | Louper-Morris contends insufficiency of intent and harm to victims. | Evidence supported conspiracy, mail, and wire fraud convictions. |
| Batson challenge – peremptory strikes | Louper-Morris argues the government struck a Black juror based on race. | The government asserted race‑neutral reasons (educational ties) for the strike. | district court’s Batson ruling was not clearly erroneous; challenge fails. |
| Material misrepresentation to grand jury | Louper-Morris contends the government misinformed the grand jury about materials on CyberStudy’s website. | Not explicitly stated, but the defense argued charging errors. | No reversible error; dismissal of indictment deemed harmless. |
| Witness intimidation and new trial | Louper-Morris claims a government witness was intimidated, denying a complete defense. | United States did not threaten the witness; defense chose not to call her. | District court did not abuse its discretion; no new trial required. |
| Tenth Amendment challenge | Morris seeks to invalidate wire/mail fraud statutes as unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment. | Statutes fall within Congress’s commerce and postal powers; challenge should fail. | Tenth Amendment challenge rejected; statutes upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Johnson, 450 F.3d 366 (8th Cir. 2006) (sufficiency review standard; intent and deception considerations)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (peremptory challenges race-based prohibitions; three-part test)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003) (Batson step three credibility of proffered reasons)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (reasonableness and appellate review of sentences; abuse of discretion standard)
- United States v. Williams, 527 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2008) (intent to defraud; materiality in mail/wire fraud context)