US v. Evgenia Popravka, No. 08-5075 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-5075 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EVGENIA A. POPRAVKA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:07-cr-00219-JBF-FBS-3) Submitted: April 8, 2009 Decided: April 27, 2009 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven A. Morley, Pennsylvania, for States Attorney, Attorney, Norfolk, MORLEY, SURIN & GRIFFIN, P.C., Philadelphia, Appellant. Dana J. Boente, Acting United Stephen W. Haynie, Assistant United States Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Evgenia Popravka was found guilty, following a jury trial, of conspiracy to defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2006), and fraudulently entering into a marriage for the purpose of evading the immigration laws of the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c) (2006). The district was court approximately sentenced seven her months to of time served, imprisonment, years of supervised release. which followed by two The court also imposed a $200 special assessment and $100,000 in restitution to the U.S. Navy. Popravka now appeals. Popravka s insufficient sole evidence claim presented on appeal at is trial that for there the jury was to conclude that she entered into a marriage for the purpose of evading any § 1325(c). provision A of defendant the challenging 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. the laws. 8 sufficiency U.S.C. of the United States v. Beidler, 110 evidence faces a heavy burden. F.3d immigration 1997). [A]n appellate court s reversal of a conviction on grounds of insufficient evidence should be confined to cases where the prosecution s failure is clear. 1984). United States v. Jones, 735 F.2d 785, 791 (4th Cir. A jury s verdict must be upheld on appeal if there is substantial evidence in the record to support it. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). 2 Glasser v. In determining whether the evidence in the record is substantial, this court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, and inquires whether there is evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc). court In does assumes evaluating the sufficiency not the credibility that review the jury resolved all testimony in favor of the government. of of the the evidence, witnesses contradictions in this and the United States v. Romer, 148 F.3d 359, 364 (4th Cir. 1998). To convict an alien of marriage fraud [under 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c)], the Government must prove: (1) the alien knowingly entered into a marriage; (2) the marriage was entered into for the purpose of evading a provision of the immigration laws; and (3) the alien knew or had reason to know of the immigration laws. United States v. Islam, 418 F.3d 1125, 1128 (10th Cir. 2005); see also United States v. Chowdhury, 169 F.3d 402, 405-06 (6th Cir. 1999). After reviewing the record in the light most favorable to the Government, we conclude there was more than sufficient evidence in this case for a reasonable finder of fact to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Popravka engaged in marriage fraud in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c). 3 Accordingly, sentence. legal before affirm Popravka s convictions and We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the we court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
