United States v. Randolph Rodman
776 F.3d 638
| 9th Cir. | 2015Background
- Rodman and five co-defendants were charged with conspiracy to defraud a U.S. agency (ATF) under 18 U.S.C. § 371.
- Defendants allegedly conspired to create and transfer post-ban machine guns using serial numbers from pre-ban guns through fraudulent Form 3/Form 4 submissions.
- Pre-ban vs post-ban machine guns: post-ban guns used pre-ban serial numbers; transfer forms misidentified model/manufacturer and omitted the method of manufacture.
- ATF regulation of firearm transfers requires accurate information and government approval; fraudulent forms impede the ATF’s function.
- Rodman argued entitlement to entrapment by estoppel due to Clark’s alleged statements about legality, and sought a buyer-seller defense instruction.
- District court denied acquittal/dismissal motions and declined the requested jury instructions; Rodman was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the government.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of conspiracy evidence | Rodman conspired to defraud the ATF by fraudulent transfers. | Insufficient evidence of an agreement to defraud or to obstruct a lawful government function. | Sufficient evidence shows agreement to obstruct ATF function via fraudulent forms. |
| Entrapment by estoppel instruction | Clark’s statements as an authorized official made the conduct legal. | Clark’s licensee status should render him an authorized official; district court erred in not instructing. | No entrapment by estoppel; Clark was not an authorized official for this context, so instruction properly denied. |
| Buyer-seller defense instruction | Buyer-seller defense applies where illicit narcotics-like conspiracy exists. | Should receive buyer-seller instruction to distinguish mere buyer-seller from conspiracy. | Buyer-seller instruction inapplicable; conspiracy involved deceptive forms to defraud the government. |
| District court's failure to give jury instructions | Required entrapment by estoppel and buyer-seller instructions. | District court abused discretion by not giving requested instructions. | District court did not err; instructions properly declined. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107 (U.S. 1987) (conspiracy to defraud encompasses obstructing a lawful government function)
- United States v. Caldwell, 989 F.2d 1056 (9th Cir. 1993) (elements of § 371 conspiracy require overt act and deceitful means)
- United States v. Little, 753 F.2d 1420 (9th Cir. 1984) (conspiracy to impede IRS functions via fraudulent filings)
- United States v. Turkish, 623 F.2d 769 (2d Cir. 1980) (extrinsic authorities on conspiracy to defraud government)
- United States v. Lorenzo, 995 F.2d 1448 (9th Cir. 1993) ( fraudulent tax form submissions as § 371 conspiracy)
- United States v. Tallmadge, 829 F.2d 767 (9th Cir. 1987) (licensed dealers as authorized officials in certain contexts)
- United States v. Batterjee, 361 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir. 2004) (entrapment by estoppel considerations for licensed dealers)
- United States v. Lennick, 18 F.3d 814 (9th Cir. 1994) (buyer-seller defense framework in conspiracy cases)
- United States v. Lechuga, 994 F.2d 346 (7th Cir. 1993) (buyer-seller concept in conspiracy contexts)
- United States v. Mincoff, 574 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2009) (buyer-seller defense applicability in conspiracy cases)