United States v. Chaika, No. 11-3355 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of seven counts of wire fraud, two counts of mail fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud. On appeal, defendant challenged his sentence. The court held that there was no abuse of Federal Rule of Evidence 403 discretion expressly granted the district court in Rule 609(a)(1)(A); there was no abuse of the district court's substantial discretion to permit expert testimony; and the sentence was substantively reasonable. However, the judgment of the district court was reversed insofar as it included a final order of restitution, and the case remanded for further restitution proceedings.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law and Sentencing. District court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to permit defendant to impeach a cooperating witness with a prior sexual misconduct conviction as the conviction was unrelated to the mortgage fraud at issue and did not require proof of a dishonest act or false statement; no error in admitting testimony from the government's expert witnesses on the mortgage loan industry and mortgage fraud; claims of error not supported by argument would not be considered; sentence was not substantively unreasonable; district court erred by entering a final order of restitution without giving defendant an opportunity to object to the restitution claims being awarded; case remanded for further restitution proceedings.
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.