United States v. Paixao, No. 16-50121 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Ninth Circuit affirmed defendants' convictions for charges related to their misuse of funds belonging to the Wounded Marine Careers Foundation (WMCF). Defendants were convicted, among other things, of violating 18 U.S.C. 666, a statute prohibiting the wrongful taking of property from an organization that receives more than $10,000 in federal "benefits" during a one-year period. The panel held that there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that WMCF did receive "benefits" within the meaning of the statute. The panel reasoned that an entity need not be the primary beneficiary of a federal program to qualify as having received "benefits," and that the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program aimed to aid veterans and to ensure the viability and quality of the organizations that served those veterans.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed two defendants’ convictions for violating 18 U.S.C. § 666, which prohibits the wrongful taking of property from an organization that receives more than $10,000 in federal “benefits” during a one-year period. The charges arose from the defendants’ misuse of funds belonging to the Wounded Marine Careers Foundation (WMCF), a non-profit foundation they founded that was dedicated to teaching interested veterans the technical skills required to succeed in the film industry. The defendants obtained funding from a Department of Veterans Affairs program, the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VRE) Program, which provides, on behalf of specific veterans, payments to the educational institutions that those veterans attend; and the VA certified WMCF as a vendor authorized to provide training. UNITED STATES V. PAIXAO 3 The panel held that there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that the Foundation received “benefits” within the meaning of § 666(b). The panel explained that an entity need not be the primary beneficiary of a federal program to qualify as having received “benefits,” and that the VRE Program aims to aid veterans and to ensure the viability and quality of the organizations that serve those veterans. The panel wrote that the requirements imposed upon institutions participating in the VRE Program further suggest that those institutions receive “benefits.”
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.