United States v. Gillion, No. 11-4942 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of four counts of mail fraud and one count of conspiring to commit mail fraud. The court held that even if the district court erred in requiring defendant to adhere to the proffer agreement, admission of the proffered statements at issue was harmless; the district court did not err in denying defendant's Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal where the government presented sufficient evidence for the jury to find that CitiCapital had a property interest in the lease-to-own payments at issue; the government submitted sufficient evidence to the jury that it could find that defendant obtained the payments "by means of material false or fraudulent pretenses[;]" and the government presented sufficient evidence for the jury to find that defendant caused the mails to be used to execute his fraudulent scheme. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
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.