United States v. Robert Feala
470 F. App'x 421
6th Cir.2012Background
- Feala was convicted on sixteen counts of making false statements to an insurance regulatory agency under 18 U.S.C. § 1033; he challenges post-trial rulings and raises sufficiency issues.
- Feala, unlicensed in Michigan, organized surplus-line insurance sales through Whitcomb & Company and Vanguard Insurance Placement, Inc.
- Whitcomb stamp-authenticated forms were filed despite lacking knowledge of the insurers; Feala directed actions that obscured the true owners/assets of entities.
- Novus Centuriae emerged as the primary writer of policies; the company had no assets and its ownership was unknown.
- Depositions in a civil matter revealed Novus Centuriae’s lack of assets and Nevis-based formation; Michigan Insurance Bureau later ordered Vanguard and Novus Centuriae to stop selling surplus insurance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of witnesses’ legal conclusions | Feala argues witnesses conveyed illegality as a legal conclusion | Feala contends district court erred by admitting such testimony | No reversible error; district court did not abuse discretion/plain error |
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove 'caused' filing | There was insufficient proof that Feala caused the forms to be filed | Witnesses showed Feala directed actions and structuring of documents | Evidence sufficient for rational jury to find Feala caused the filings beyond reasonable doubt |
| Materiality of false statements | False statements were immaterial since alternatives existed | Statements were material because they concealed improper arrangements and delayed regulatory scrutiny | Statements were material; district court properly denied judgment of acquittal |
Key Cases Cited
- Morales v. American Honda Motor Company, Inc., 151 F.3d 500 (6th Cir. 1998) (standard for reviewing trial court decisions on evidentiary rulings)
- United States v. Stonefish, 402 F.3d 691 (6th Cir. 2005) (plain-error review where objections were not preserved)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1989) (sufficiency of the evidence standard for conviction)
- United States v. Abdullah, 162 F.3d 897 (6th Cir. 1998) (defendant’s counsel elicited testimony; no reversible error)